The increase in the number of newspaper articles exposed as fabricatio

Question

The increase in the number of newspaper articles exposed as fabrications serves to bolster the contention that publishers are more interested in boosting circulation than in printing the truth. Even minor publications have staffs to check such obvious fraud.

The argument above assumes that

A. Newspaper stories exposed as fabrications are a recent phenomenon.

B. Everything a newspaper prints must be factually verifiable.

C. Fact checking is more comprehensive for minor publications than for major ones.

D. Only recently have newspapers admitted to publishing intentionally fraudulent stories.

E. The publishers of newspapers are the people who decide what to print in their newspapers.

siddharthmuzumdar · Accepted Answer

Hi micr0c0sm,
First of all, I do not think the OA is debatable. The answer is crystal clear. It is in fact a very simple logic gap to be filled up. The correct answer E is absolutely correct.

For all others who are not sure about the OA, the OA is E. This question is from Kaplan Premier book. In case you are interested in the OE, here is Kaplan's OE:

There are actually many assumptions in this argument, so it's entirely possible that you made a valid prephrase even if you didn't find the answer right away. The argument basically states that because more newspaper articles are being exposed as fabrications, publishers must care more about raising circulation than printing the truth. There are two scope shifts here:
1. The author gives evidence about  newspaper articles  but draws a conclusion about  publishers 
2. The author shifts from  fabrications  to  boosted circulation .

So if your prephrase was something like either
1. Publishers have influence over newspaper articles or
2. Fabricated articles boost circulation
then give yourself a pat on the back, because you were right. It so happens that the GMAT used (1) as the basis of the right answer - you can see that it matches with (E) quite nicely. So you may have needed the Denial Test (Negation approach) to evaluate the answer choices. Let's examine them that way.

(A) What if newspaper articles have been exposed as fake for a while? That wouldn't mean that such exposures couldn't have been on the rise lately.

(B) What if not everything a newspaper prints can be factually verifiable? Again, allowing a handful of unverified articles in a year does not mean that the number of such articles has not been on the rise.

(C) What if major publications were as good at fact-checking as minor ones? That certainly would not damage the author's argument - if anything, it would strengthen it !

(D) is very similar to (A) - newspapers could have been admitting to this behavior for a while, and that would not mean that the behavior is not on the rise.

But if we deny (E) and claim that publishers make no decisions about what is printed, then it is hardly possible to pin the blame for the fabrications on them, and the argument collapses.

The above is what Kaplan had to say about the OA and I completely agree with it. The OA is not debatable at all. E is the OA.

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

The argument made is this -

Increase in numbers of articles exposed as fake --> Publishers are interested in boosting circulation than in printing the truth.

Let us look at each of the answer options -

Option A - Incorrect.
the argument clearly states that there has been an increase in the number of articles exposed as fabrications. this implies that exposing articles as fabrications is not entirely recent. Only, the increase is recent.

Option B - Incorrect.
Negate this.
"Some of the articles published must be factually verifiable". This does not destroy the argument. If there is an increase in number of fabricated stories among those that can be verified, the argument made still stands.

Option C - Incorrect.
We are talking about all publications in general for the argument.

Option D - Incorrect.
We have no idea whether the publications have admitted to such things. Moreover, we do not know whether they have done so only recently or from some time.

Option E - Correct answer.
If publishers have NO control on what to print, then the conclusion that Publishers are more interested in boosting circulation than printing the truth will collapse.

Bunuel · Answer

KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

E

Evidence: more newspaper articles exposed as fabrications.

Conclusion: Publishers want to increase circulation, not print the truth. This makes sense only if we assume (E), that publishers decide what to print. If (E) weren't true and this decision were up to someone else, the argument would fall apart.

Since the argument claims only an increase in made-up articles exposed, it's not necessary that they be a recent phenomenon, so (A)'s not assumed. (B) goes too far-it's not necessary that every article be factually verifiable in order for there to have been an increase in fabrications. As for (C), the author's claim that "even minor publications" have fact checkers is meant to emphasize that the publications know they're not printing the truth, not that minor ones are better at fact checking than major ones. And (D) brings up admission of guilt, which the author never mentions-the articles in question were exposed as frauds, not admitted to be frauds.

mallya12 · Answer

Please someone explain me the argument clearly. I understand the first sentence which tells that the number of fabricated articles is increasing, this is evidence that publications care only about circulation and not the truthfulness of the article.

What is the importance of the second sentence i.e Even minor publications have staffs to check such obvious fraud.

What is the importance of the second sentence i.e Even minor publications have staffs to check such obvious fraud.

PANKAJKAUSHIK59 · Answer

SIR PLEASE REPLY FOR THIS QUESTION, AS I NEED TO CHALLENGE THIS QUESTION AS THIS SAME QUESTION WAS ASKED IN MY EXAM AND DIFFERENT ANSWER IS BEING TAKEN

The increase in the number of newspaper articles exposed as fabricatio

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 increase in the number of newspaper articles exposed as fabricatio

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