The Motor Drivers Association annually hosts a charity event to raise

Question

The Motor Drivers’ Association annually hosts a charity event to raise donations for several local welfare organisations. The funds raised at this year’s charity event were unusually low because of unexpectedly dismal attendance by the locals. All the usual mediums of publicity used every year such as televisions, big tabloids, hoardings, etc. were used to extensively advertise the event well ahead of the set date for this year’s event too. Only a few small magazines were not considered this year for the purpose of publicizing the event. This shows even the smallest departure from the usual can greatly impact the outcome of the situation.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. While most people who skipped this year read the small magazines, only a minority of them were not reached through other print and advertising channels.

B. Most of the donations come from the businessmen of the city who liberally contribute to the funds under their corporate social responsibility.

C. Several fund raisers that captured the interest of many of the regular charity donators were held in the city on the same day, something that would otherwise be impossible because of paucity of banquet halls.

D. There has been very little variation in the circulation of the small magazines of the city.

E. The charity event organized by the Motor Drivers’ Association is the most eagerly awaited annual event in the city.

dprasadd · Answer

In order to weaken the argument we must attack the "reason for low attendance by the locals" and look for such an option that weakens the funds raised weren't because of the consideration of small magazines.

A. While most people who skipped this year read the small magazines,  only a minority  of them were not reached through other print and advertising channels.---> If the minority of them were not reached then it shouldn't affect the funds. So, no.

B. Most of the donations come from the businessmen of the city who liberally contribute to the funds under their corporate social responsibility.---> This doesn't explain why the attendance was low.

C. Several fund raisers that captured the interest of many of the regular charity donators were held in the city on the same day, something that would otherwise be impossible because of paucity of banquet halls.---> This looks good. If regular charity donators went on to some other event on the same day it can be the reason for low attendance and not because of consideration of small magazines.

D. There has been very little variation in the circulation of the small magazines of the city.---> Not a sound answer. Little or not this fails to weaken the argument.

E. The charity event organized by the Motor Drivers’ Association is the most eagerly awaited annual event in the city.---> Doesn't explain the cause of low attendance. So, out.

TheBipedalHorse · Answer

The author says - The funds raised at this year’s charity event were unusually low  because of unexpectedly dismal attendance by the locals

Where as option B says -  Most of the donations come from the businessmen of the city  who liberally contribute to the funds under their corporate social responsibility.

So it directly calls into question whether the attendance itself was the reason behind low fundraising. What am I missing here?

Cheenu123 · Answer

The Author says that just because few small magazines were not considered for publicising the event, there was dismal attendance of local people as well as unusually low charity .

To weaken this, we require something which can prove that there was some other reason for low attendance .

Option C clearly mentions that because of the presence of other charity events, many regular donators were attracted towards attending those events. So, this option is a weakener.

GMATking94 · Answer

Let's see what the Questions says -

We need to weaken that -

No lets dive into answer analysis -

A. While most people who skipped this year read the small magazines, only a minority of them were not reached through other print and advertising channels. -  This does not give any reason to doubt the authors reasoning. It says that only a minority of them were not reached, but what if they were the ones who could have contributed the most to charity?

B. Most of the donations come from the businessmen of the city who liberally contribute to the funds under their corporate social responsibility. -  This options is irrelevant. We do not need this information to doubt the author.

C. Several fund raisers that captured the interest of many of the regular charity donators were held in the city on the same day, something that would otherwise be impossible because of paucity of banquet halls. _  This clearly gives an alternate reason why the donation was poor this year. Since, other fund raisers were held on the same day, it is logical to say that it resulted in poor collection for the Motor Driver's Association.

D. There has been very little variation in the circulation of the small magazines of the city. -  This is irrelevant with our discussion.

E. The charity event organized by the Motor Drivers’ Association is the most eagerly awaited annual event in the city. -  This has nothing to do with how much people donate.
 
Hence, (C) is the best answer.

AbhishekDhanraJ72 · Answer

The argument states that the funds raised at this year's charity event were unusually low due to poor attendance by the locals, despite extensive advertising using the usual mediums. It concludes that even the smallest departure from the usual can greatly impact the outcome. To weaken this argument, we need to find an option that suggests another reason for the low attendance or challenges the idea that a small departure from the usual advertising methods was the cause.

Option C most seriously weakens the argument. It states that several other fund raisers that captured the interest of many regular charity donators were held in the city on the same day, which would otherwise be impossible due to a lack of banquet halls. This suggests that the low attendance at the charity event may be due to competition from other events rather than a failure of the advertising efforts.

sambhavrastogi · Answer

So we eliminate option A cause it question the premise right ?

DmitryFarber · Answer

Answer A doesn't contradict anything said in the premises. It tells us that people who skipped the event mostly  do  read the small magazines that were passed up. The premises never say that people don't read these magazines. A also says that most people were reached by other means, but again, the argument never says otherwise. The problem with A is that it doesn't give us a reason to question the stated interpretation (small changes make a difference) in favor of another. If anything, this supports the idea that the failure to advertise in these small magazines was in fact the source of trouble, since clearly people were still getting the information from other sources and still chose not to come.

One source of trouble may be that the argument as written is not actually fully written out. I think the author's intention was to suggest that not advertising in these magazines was the small "departure" referenced in the conclusion. However, there's no indication that these small magazines  were  used in previous years, so it's not actually clear from the argument what the departure was. It's hard to strengthen or weaken an argument when it's not 100% clear what the argument is. An official question wouldn't operate this way.

The Motor Drivers Association annually hosts a charity event to raise

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The Motor Drivers Association annually hosts a charity event to raise

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards