The word "loophole" is a loaded, partisan word, one that implies wrongdoing and scandal. When "loophole" creeps into news stories, they start to read like editorials.
So news reporters should not use the term "loophole" in their stories unless they provide evidence of wrongdoing.Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the reasoning in the argument?
(A) Making use of a loophole
never constitutes wrongdoing or scandal. - WRONG. Totally goes against the conclusion in blue text.
(B) Editorials
should meet the same journalistic standards as news stories. - WRONG. It does not answer the questions as to why new reporters should not use the term "loophole".
(C) News stories need to give evidence to back up any suggestions of misconduct. - CORRECT. Rephrases the conclusion just.
(D) Editorial writers
should be free to use loaded, partisan words. - WRONG. Like B this too is not having any impact. Looks bland feels bland.
(E) News reporters
should not report on wrongdoing and scandal that is not a matter of public interest. - WRONG. Just like B and D.
Looks abstract as it can but it's simple as it can.
Answer B.