It is currently 19 Oct 2017, 10:03

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# The news media is often accused of being willing to do

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 899

Kudos [?]: 886 [0], given: 322

Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2013, 20:57
6
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

60% (01:26) correct 40% (01:46) wrong based on 322 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The news media is often accused of being willing to do anything for ratings. However, recent action by a television network indicates that the news media is sometimes guided by moral principle. This network had discovered through polling voters on the east coast that the Republican candidate for President had garnered enough votes to ensure victory before the polls closed on the west coast. However, the network withheld this information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.

Which one of the following most strengthens the argument?

(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President.
(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner.
(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed.
(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race.
(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers.

Source:LSAT
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Last edited by broall on 15 May 2017, 09:49, edited 1 time in total.
Reformatted question

Kudos [?]: 886 [0], given: 322

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1377

Kudos [?]: 1675 [0], given: 62

Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2013, 22:09
targetgmatchotu wrote:
The news media is often accused of being willing to do anything for ratings. However, recent action by a television network indicates that the news media is sometimes guided by moral principle. This network had discovered through polling voters on the east coast that the Republican candidate for President had garnered enough votes to ensure victory before the polls closed on the west coast. However, the network withheld this information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.
Which one of the following most strengthens the argument?
(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President.
(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner.
(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed.
(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race.
(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers.
source:LSAT

Try to find the conclusion.
The conclusion is: "news media is sometimes guided by moral principle".
For the conclusion to be true, the author gives some evidence that the network withheld some information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.
In order to strengthen the argument, one must find that a way to show that what the news media did was endorsed by moral principle OR to show that if it had disclosed the information, its ratings would have increased.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1675 [0], given: 62

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 287

Kudos [?]: 174 [0], given: 75

Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V33
WE: Consulting (Telecommunications)
Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2013, 10:20
targetgmatchotu wrote:
The news media is often accused of being willing to do anything for ratings. However, recent action by a television network indicates that the news media is sometimes guided by moral principle. This network had discovered through polling voters on the east coast that the Republican candidate for President had garnered enough votes to ensure victory before the polls closed on the west coast. However, the network withheld this information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.
Which one of the following most strengthens the argument?
(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President.
(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner.
(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed.
(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race.
(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers.
source:LSAT

Convoluted Conclusion. But, once you find the conclusion then it is easy to find the answer.

Conclusion: news media is sometimes guided by moral principle
Option B strengthens the conclusion.
_________________

YOU CAN, IF YOU THINK YOU CAN

Kudos [?]: 174 [0], given: 75

Manager
Status: Dedicates 2013 to MBA !!
Joined: 06 Jul 2012
Posts: 59

Kudos [?]: 184 [0], given: 14

Location: United States (MI)
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GPA: 3.8
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2013, 16:24
Okies...Well...I'll try to explain in Detail -

Fact - A network did not reveal results.
Conclusion: News media is sometimes guided by moral principle.

(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President. Ohh...so they did endorse him ! But this is not close to our question - whether ratings or morals were involved.

(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner. - Common !! The ratings would have increased if they predicted the winner. What kept them back - might be Morals Hold it for now.

(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed. - So what?? This fact doesn't lead us anywhere/ OOS.

(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race. - This is the weakener instead. If they knew that holding the results will in turn get them better ratings, definitely morals are not in picture.

(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers. - So it was the fear and not Morals. Weakener instead.

So, B looks like the best choice here. Hope this helps !!
_________________

Thanks and Regards,
Charu Kapoor

Never Never Never GIVE UP !!

Kudos [?]: 184 [0], given: 14

Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2014
Posts: 231

Kudos [?]: 56 [0], given: 78

Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2014, 17:27
CharuKapoor wrote:
Okies...Well...I'll try to explain in Detail -

Fact - A network did not reveal results.
Conclusion: News media is sometimes guided by moral principle.

(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President. Ohh...so they did endorse him ! But this is not close to our question - whether ratings or morals were involved.

(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner. - Common !! The ratings would have increased if they predicted the winner. What kept them back - might be Morals Hold it for now.

(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed. - So what?? This fact doesn't lead us anywhere/ OOS.

(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race. - This is the weakener instead. If they knew that holding the results will in turn get them better ratings, definitely morals are not in picture.

(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers. - So it was the fear and not Morals. Weakener instead.

So, B looks like the best choice here. Hope this helps !!

But here's my question. If east coast poll said Republican leader had enough to win but network waited for west coast before saying anything, doesn't option A suggest they put accuracy of polls over own personal agenda?

Whereas in B if the network was worried about predicting the winner they would wait for both west and east coast polls to get it right?
_________________

Kudos [?]: 56 [0], given: 78

Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2014
Posts: 231

Kudos [?]: 56 [0], given: 78

Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2014, 23:44
bump? This answer is torture for me, would really some input.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 56 [0], given: 78

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 484

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 342

Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Apr 2016, 03:39
Marcab wrote:
targetgmatchotu wrote:
The news media is often accused of being willing to do anything for ratings. However, recent action by a television network indicates that the news media is sometimes guided by moral principle. This network had discovered through polling voters on the east coast that the Republican candidate for President had garnered enough votes to ensure victory before the polls closed on the west coast. However, the network withheld this information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.
Which one of the following most strengthens the argument?
(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President.
(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner.
(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed.
(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race.
(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers.
source:LSAT

Try to find the conclusion.
The conclusion is: "news media is sometimes guided by moral principle".
For the conclusion to be true, the author gives some evidence that the network withheld some information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.
In order to strengthen the argument, one must find that a way to show that what the news media did was endorsed by moral principle OR to show that if it had disclosed the information, its ratings would have increased.

But then there is a downside too that if it didn't predict the winner correctly it will lose the ranking.
So its not guided by moral principal but simple mathematics.

I think it should be A. The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President but it still didn't use it media to further its cause. so that's morality.

Marcab daagh Pl help

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 342

Manager
Joined: 03 Apr 2013
Posts: 243

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 826

Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Apr 2016, 02:38
Marcab wrote:
targetgmatchotu wrote:
The news media is often accused of being willing to do anything for ratings. However, recent action by a television network indicates that the news media is sometimes guided by moral principle. This network had discovered through polling voters on the east coast that the Republican candidate for President had garnered enough votes to ensure victory before the polls closed on the west coast. However, the network withheld this information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.
Which one of the following most strengthens the argument?
(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President.
(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner.
(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed.
(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race.
(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers.
source:LSAT

Try to find the conclusion.
The conclusion is: "news media is sometimes guided by moral principle".
For the conclusion to be true, the author gives some evidence that the network withheld some information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.
In order to strengthen the argument, one must find that a way to show that what the news media did was endorsed by moral principle OR to show that if it had disclosed the information, its ratings would have increased.

But then there is a downside too that if it didn't predict the winner correctly it will lose the ranking.
So its not guided by moral principal but simple mathematics.

I think it should be A. The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President but it still didn't use it media to further its cause. so that's morality.

Marcab daagh Pl help

Hey! IMO B

Let me try to explain

Conclusion: The news was guided by morals.

Now..lets pay attention to whats written in the passage
It clearly says that --> News networks are accused of driving their decisions by the ratings they receive. But one of those news networks(we'll call it N) drove its decisions by morals instead.

Paying attention to B
It says: The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner.

That means there are only two outcomes

1. It predicts the correct winner and wins ratings.
2. It predicts the wrong winner and wins ratings.

The common point between the two being that the news channel HAS TO PREDICT A WINNER.
But we know from the passage that,N got to know about the winner from its sources before the results were out. Even then, N kept the information secret, thereby possibly risking its ratings.

_________________

Spread some love..Like = +1 Kudos

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 826

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2015
Posts: 443

Kudos [?]: 305 [0], given: 18

Location: India
WE: General Management (Education)
Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2017, 06:52
The news media is often accused of being willing to do anything for ratings. However, recent action by a television network indicates that the news media is sometimes guided by moral principle. This network had discovered through polling voters on the east coast that the Republican candidate for President had garnered enough votes to ensure victory before the polls closed on the west coast. However, the network withheld this information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.

Which one of the following most strengthens the argument?

(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President.
(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner.
(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed.
(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race.
(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers.
_________________

If you liked my post, kindly give me a Kudos. Thanks.

Last edited by broall on 15 May 2017, 09:48, edited 1 time in total.
Merged topic. Please search before posting question.

Kudos [?]: 305 [0], given: 18

Intern
Status: GMAT tutor
Joined: 20 Apr 2017
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

GMAT 1: 770 Q49 V47
Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2017, 08:56
rohan2345 wrote:
The news media is often accused of being willing to do anything for ratings. However, recent action by a television network indicates that the news media is sometimes guided by moral principle. This network had discovered through polling voters on the east coast that the Republican candidate for President had garnered enough votes to ensure victory before the polls closed on the west coast. However, the network withheld this information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.

Which one of the following most strengthens the argument?

(A) The network had endorsed the Republican candidate for President.
(B) The network expected its ratings to increase if it predicted the winner of the presidential race, and to decrease if did not predict the winner.
(C) A rival network did predict a winner of the presidential race before the polls on the west coast closed.
(D) The network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race.
(E) The network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race could so anger Congress that it might enact legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers.

Our job is to strengthen the argument. What is the conclusion? It is: The news media [are] sometimes guided by moral principle.

Why? Because a specific network had discovered that the Republican candidate had garnered enough votes to ensure victory before the polls closed. Nevertheless, the network withheld this information until the polls on the west coast closed so that the information would not affect the outcome of key congressional races.

What's the assumption? The assumption is that this decision was made on moral principle rather than on self-interest or other factors. If, for example, we could show that making the announcement would have resulted in a loss of sponsors or ratings then we could argue that the real reason was self-interest.

So our job is to show that other possible reasons (money, prestige, ratings, etc.) were not a factor.

Answer choice (A) is irrelevant information. The argument is about key congressional races not about the president.
Answer choice (B) is the credited response. Since the network could have benefited by announcing the winner but it did not do so, the decision must have been guided by principle.
Answer choice (C) is irrelevant. We are not interested in other networks.
Answer choice (D) is the opposite answer. If the network believed that it would receive higher ratings by not predicting the winner of the presidential race, then the decision may well have been guided more by rational self-interest than by principle.
Answer choice (E) is also the opposite answer. If the network feared that predicting the winner of the presidential race might anger Congress enough to cause legislation preventing all future polling outside of voting centers, then the decision may well have been guided more by rational self-interest than by principle.
_________________

Elias Latour
Verbal Specialist @ ApexGMAT
blog.apexgmat.com
+1 (646) 736-7622

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

Re: The news media is often accused of being willing to do   [#permalink] 15 May 2017, 08:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by