Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 1008:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Sep 0812:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Looking for your GMAT motivation to break through the score plateau? Pragati improved her score by massive 160 points with strategic guidance and hard-work! Find out how personalized mentorship and a strong mindset can turn GMAT struggles into success.
Sep 1001:00 AM EDT
-02:00 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2107:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
65% (02:05) correct
35%
(02:26)
wrong
based on 13004
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories. The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) The reporter who writes a story is usually better placed than the reporters' editor is to judge what the story's most newsworthy features are.
(B) To write a headline that is clever, a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies.
(C) Most reporters rarely bother to find out how other reporters have written stories and headlines about the same events that they themselves have covered.
(D) For virtually any story that a reporter writes, there are at least a few people who know more about the story's subject matter than does the reporter.
(E) The kind of headlines that newspaper editors want are those that anyone who has read a reporter's story in its entirety will recognize as clever.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) The reporter who writes a story is usually better placed than the reporters' editor is to judge what the story's most newsworthy features are.
(B) To write a headline that is clever, a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies.
(C) Most reporters rarely bother to find out how other reporters have written stories and headlines about the same events that they themselves have covered.
(D) For virtually any story that a reporter writes, there are at least a few people who know more about the story's subject matter than does the reporter.
(E) The kind of headlines that newspaper editors want are those that anyone who has read a reporter's story in its entirety will recognize as clever.
Newspaper Headlines
Step 1: Identify the Question
The words most strengthens in the question indicate that this is a Strengthen the Argument question.
Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument
© Ed shouldn’t let reporters write own HL
Clever HL have info not in story
Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
On Strengthen questions, the goal is to find an answer that will make the conclusion more likely. In this case, you are looking to support the idea that reporters should not write headlines for their own stories.
Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right
(A) This answer weakens the argument, suggesting that the reporter who wrote the story would be in a better position to write the headline because he knows what is newsworthy in the story.
(B) This information weakens the conclusion. A reporter is very likely to have sufficient understanding of the story, so he would be able to write the headline.
(C) It is unclear if this information relates to whether reporters should write their own headlines. Research about other reporters’ methods might help a reporter if those methods were better, but could also hurt story and headline quality if the other reporters also made errors, such as writing headlines that were too clever.
(D) In the context of this argument, knowledge about the story is actually bad because it results in writing headlines that include information not in the story. This answer suggests that people beyond the reporter may actually have this problem as well. If anything, this answer slightly weakens the argument because it suggests that even if a reporter does not write his own headline, the headline could still suffer the same problems if the person chosen to write it knows too much.
(E) CORRECT. The argument states that reporters write headlines with information not in the story. Although you might have recognized the problem with this type of headline (how would the average reader see it was clever or understand?), it is not clearly stated that this type of a headline is a problem. Maybe newspapers like having such headlines to attract clever readers or encourage readers to think more deeply about the subject. This answer establishes that the kind of headlines reporters were writing are, in fact, not desired, at least from the perspective of the editor, supporting the idea that the reporters should not write their own headlines.
Argument Evaluation
Situation
The headlines newspaper reporters write for their own stories are often clever only because they allude to little-known information that never appears explicitly in the stories themselves.
Reasoning
What would most help the argument support the conclusion that newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write headlines for their own stories? The argument's only explicit premise is that the headlines newspaper reporters write for their own stories are often clever only because they allude to little-known information that never appears explicitly in the stories themselves. In order for this premise to support the conclusion that newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write their own headlines, it would be helpful to be given a reason why editors should avoid headlines alluding to such little-known information.
(A) This suggests that reporters are likely to write better headlines for their stories than editors are, so it weakens the argument that editors should not allow reporters to write their own headlines.
(B) Since a reporter who wrote a story is likely to understand that story well, this does not provide a reason why editors should not allow reporters to write their own headlines.
(C) If most reporters did what is suggested, they could perhaps hone their headline-writing skills—unless almost all reporters are weak in such skills, as suggested in the given information. The fact that they do not bother to do so may help explain why reporters' headline-writing skills are weak. An explanation of why this is so does not provide additional support for the argument's conclusion.
(D) The people who know more about a story's subject matter than the reporter writing the story might be just as likely to see the cleverness of allusions to little-known information as the reporters are. So, to the extent that this is relevant at all, it slightly weakens the argument by suggesting that obscurely clever headlines sometimes function as intended.
(E) Correct. The argument's explicit premise suggests that typically a reporter's headline for his or her own story cannot be recognized as clever by a reader who has read the whole story. So, if editors want headlines that anyone who has read the accompanying stories would recognize as clever, they have a reason not to let reporters write the headlines.
Step 1: Identify the Question
The words most strengthens in the question indicate that this is a Strengthen the Argument question.
Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument
© Ed shouldn’t let reporters write own HL
Clever HL have info not in story
Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
On Strengthen questions, the goal is to find an answer that will make the conclusion more likely. In this case, you are looking to support the idea that reporters should not write headlines for their own stories.
Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right
(A) This answer weakens the argument, suggesting that the reporter who wrote the story would be in a better position to write the headline because he knows what is newsworthy in the story.
(B) This information weakens the conclusion. A reporter is very likely to have sufficient understanding of the story, so he would be able to write the headline.
(C) It is unclear if this information relates to whether reporters should write their own headlines. Research about other reporters’ methods might help a reporter if those methods were better, but could also hurt story and headline quality if the other reporters also made errors, such as writing headlines that were too clever.
(D) In the context of this argument, knowledge about the story is actually bad because it results in writing headlines that include information not in the story. This answer suggests that people beyond the reporter may actually have this problem as well. If anything, this answer slightly weakens the argument because it suggests that even if a reporter does not write his own headline, the headline could still suffer the same problems if the person chosen to write it knows too much.
(E) CORRECT. The argument states that reporters write headlines with information not in the story. Although you might have recognized the problem with this type of headline (how would the average reader see it was clever or understand?), it is not clearly stated that this type of a headline is a problem. Maybe newspapers like having such headlines to attract clever readers or encourage readers to think more deeply about the subject. This answer establishes that the kind of headlines reporters were writing are, in fact, not desired, at least from the perspective of the editor, supporting the idea that the reporters should not write their own headlines.
Argument Evaluation
Situation
The headlines newspaper reporters write for their own stories are often clever only because they allude to little-known information that never appears explicitly in the stories themselves.
Reasoning
What would most help the argument support the conclusion that newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write headlines for their own stories? The argument's only explicit premise is that the headlines newspaper reporters write for their own stories are often clever only because they allude to little-known information that never appears explicitly in the stories themselves. In order for this premise to support the conclusion that newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write their own headlines, it would be helpful to be given a reason why editors should avoid headlines alluding to such little-known information.
(A) This suggests that reporters are likely to write better headlines for their stories than editors are, so it weakens the argument that editors should not allow reporters to write their own headlines.
(B) Since a reporter who wrote a story is likely to understand that story well, this does not provide a reason why editors should not allow reporters to write their own headlines.
(C) If most reporters did what is suggested, they could perhaps hone their headline-writing skills—unless almost all reporters are weak in such skills, as suggested in the given information. The fact that they do not bother to do so may help explain why reporters' headline-writing skills are weak. An explanation of why this is so does not provide additional support for the argument's conclusion.
(D) The people who know more about a story's subject matter than the reporter writing the story might be just as likely to see the cleverness of allusions to little-known information as the reporters are. So, to the extent that this is relevant at all, it slightly weakens the argument by suggesting that obscurely clever headlines sometimes function as intended.
(E) Correct. The argument's explicit premise suggests that typically a reporter's headline for his or her own story cannot be recognized as clever by a reader who has read the whole story. So, if editors want headlines that anyone who has read the accompanying stories would recognize as clever, they have a reason not to let reporters write the headlines.
Every tricky question should trigger a follow up quiz.
Build that habit with
GMAT Club Forum Quiz →.
sidagar
The headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever. However, the headlines are only clever because they refer to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter. If that information is little-known AND if the reporter does not mention that information in the story, then we can infer that most readers will not know that information and thus will not appreciate the clever headlines.
Imagine that a physicist were to give a lecture to a classroom of students at a university. During the lecture, the physicist makes several jokes that would only be funny to someone working in the physicist's laboratory. Sure, the jokes might be funny, but none of the students would understand or appreciate the humor.
Similarly, the headlines written by the reporters are often clever, but most of the readers cannot understand or appreciate why they are clever even after reading the story. In other words, unless you happen to know the "little-known information" that the reporter knows, you will not recognize the headline as clever, even after reading the entire story.
Thus, if newspapers editors prefer headlines that can be recognized as clever by anyone who has read the story in its entirety (choice (E)), then newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories.
_________________
GMAT/GRE/EA tutors @ www.gmatninja.com | YouTube | Articles | IG
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
RonPurewal
Expert
Tutor
Joined: 15 Nov 2013
Last visit: 12 Aug 2026
Posts: 252
GMAT Focus 1: 805 Q90 V90 DI90 
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Expert reply
I received a private message about this thread.
First — as always — you should go to the problem statement: You need to strengthen an argument.
So, we need to...
...determine the point of the "argument";
...express the argument in a more accessible form ("explain to a 10-year-old");
...determine what a correct answer should do.
Find the point of the argument:
This is straightforward, since the argument consists of only two statements — the second of which is explicitly labeled as "the reason for" the first.
Accordingly, the FIRST statement must be the argument's point (conclusion).
Simplify the argument / "Explain to a 10-year-old":
"When reporters write headlines, they use stuff that they know — but that random readers won't know. (This stuff makes the headlines "clever" — but, most people won't KNOW that they are "clever" headlines, because they won't have the requisite knowledge!)
Therefore...
Reporters shouldn't be allowed to write headlines for their own stories."
Define a correct answer:
Because of the simplicity of this argument, there really isn't much that a correct answer could do — it just has to beef up the connection between the single stated reason and the conclusion.
A CORRECT ANSWER needs to SOLIDIFY THE CONNECTION between
"MOST PEOPLE WON'T UNDERSTAND headlines written by reporters"
and
"Headlines SHOULDN'T BE WRITTEN by reporters".
Use this standard to "interview" the answer choices:
• If "newsworthy features" are NOT related to headlines... then this choice is irrelevant.
Bad either way.
(NO answer choice will EVER be a toss-up between CORRECT and irrelevant!)
This choice is irrelevant, because the argument already acknowledges that reporters' headlines ARE clever.
The issue is not that the headlines AREN'T clever; the issue is that random readers won't RECOGNIZE that they are clever.
This choice does not speak to the actual issue — i.e., that reporters tend to use obscure information in crafting headlines — and is thus irrelevant.
This choice is almost certainly true, just by common sense. (Go to a newspaper site and click on any random article. Obviously, there will be people in the world who have dedicated their lives and careers to becoming experts on the exact thing that is the topic of the article... these people will clearly know more about that thing than will the reporter.)
...But this choice is irrelevant, because there is no reason to think that these world-class experts would be available to write headlines. Therefore, we don't care whether they exist.
(Furthermore — The reporters' PROBLEM is already that they have TOO MUCH "little-known" knowledge! So, even in the incredibly farfetched scenario in which these experts could be tapped to write headlines... THEIR headlines would have the same problem as the reporters' headlines, only even WORSE!)
If this statement is true, then the typical reporter's headline — as described — will NOT be the kind of headline that newspaper editors want, since only readers who are privy to the "little-known information" will recognize the reporter's headline as clever.
This statement provides strong additional support for the notion that editors should not allow reporters to write headlines for their stories.
CORRECT ANSWER
First — as always — you should go to the problem statement: You need to strengthen an argument.
So, we need to...
...determine the point of the "argument";
...express the argument in a more accessible form ("explain to a 10-year-old");
...determine what a correct answer should do.
Find the point of the argument:
This is straightforward, since the argument consists of only two statements — the second of which is explicitly labeled as "the reason for" the first.
Accordingly, the FIRST statement must be the argument's point (conclusion).
Simplify the argument / "Explain to a 10-year-old":
"When reporters write headlines, they use stuff that they know — but that random readers won't know. (This stuff makes the headlines "clever" — but, most people won't KNOW that they are "clever" headlines, because they won't have the requisite knowledge!)
Therefore...
Reporters shouldn't be allowed to write headlines for their own stories."
Define a correct answer:
Because of the simplicity of this argument, there really isn't much that a correct answer could do — it just has to beef up the connection between the single stated reason and the conclusion.
A CORRECT ANSWER needs to SOLIDIFY THE CONNECTION between
"MOST PEOPLE WON'T UNDERSTAND headlines written by reporters"
and
"Headlines SHOULDN'T BE WRITTEN by reporters".
Use this standard to "interview" the answer choices:
Quote:
• If "newsworthy features" are related to HEADLINES... then this choice goes the WRONG WAY. (In that case, this choice would give a consideration IN FAVOR OF letting reporters write headlines.)
• If "newsworthy features" are NOT related to headlines... then this choice is irrelevant.
Bad either way.
(NO answer choice will EVER be a toss-up between CORRECT and irrelevant!)
Quote:
This choice is irrelevant, because the argument already acknowledges that reporters' headlines ARE clever.
The issue is not that the headlines AREN'T clever; the issue is that random readers won't RECOGNIZE that they are clever.
Quote:
This choice does not speak to the actual issue — i.e., that reporters tend to use obscure information in crafting headlines — and is thus irrelevant.
Quote:
This choice is almost certainly true, just by common sense. (Go to a newspaper site and click on any random article. Obviously, there will be people in the world who have dedicated their lives and careers to becoming experts on the exact thing that is the topic of the article... these people will clearly know more about that thing than will the reporter.)
...But this choice is irrelevant, because there is no reason to think that these world-class experts would be available to write headlines. Therefore, we don't care whether they exist.
(Furthermore — The reporters' PROBLEM is already that they have TOO MUCH "little-known" knowledge! So, even in the incredibly farfetched scenario in which these experts could be tapped to write headlines... THEIR headlines would have the same problem as the reporters' headlines, only even WORSE!)
Quote:
If this statement is true, then the typical reporter's headline — as described — will NOT be the kind of headline that newspaper editors want, since only readers who are privy to the "little-known information" will recognize the reporter's headline as clever.
This statement provides strong additional support for the notion that editors should not allow reporters to write headlines for their stories.
CORRECT ANSWER
General Discussion
arvind910619
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Last visit: 18 Oct 2024
Posts: 800
Status:Learning
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
Products:
Updated on: 16 Aug 2020, 06:51
Originally posted by arvind910619 on 29 May 2017, 23:11.
Last edited by arvind910619 on 16 Aug 2020, 06:51, edited 1 time in total.
Last edited by arvind910619 on 16 Aug 2020, 06:51, edited 1 time in total.
Hi ,
Please provide official explanation .
My answer is wrong as per the OA given.
On second reading i got the answer.
The argument talks about headlines which can be understood by all who have read the story .
If only reporters write the headlines then , people who will read the headlines will not consider them clever or even worse will not be able to deduce them from the story.
So editors should write the headlines
Is my reasoning correct ?
Please provide official explanation .
My answer is wrong as per the OA given.
On second reading i got the answer.
The argument talks about headlines which can be understood by all who have read the story .
If only reporters write the headlines then , people who will read the headlines will not consider them clever or even worse will not be able to deduce them from the story.
So editors should write the headlines
Is my reasoning correct ?
ganand
Summary - Reports write headlines that allude to little know details of the story => That's why editors should not allow them to write the headlines.
Strengthen - Editors might want people to read the headline and be able to relate the entire article back to the headline.
A - Weakens
B - If we assume the answer says reporters, it actually weakens the conclusion.
C - Irrelevant
D - Reporters knowledge Vs other people isn't mentioned in the argument
E - Sounds Correct as the editors want people to read the entire story and be able to relate that with the story.
E is the correct answer IMO.
Posts: 4,849
let us simplify the argument given --
Headlines that reporters write allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but does not appear explicitly in the story --> Editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories
let us take a look at the answer options given --
Option A - Incorrect
If the reporter is better placed than the editor to judge the story's most newsworthy features, then probably the editor should let the reporter decide on the headlines. This weakens the conclusion.
Option B - Incorrect
Not relevant as the argument is concerned about whether reporters should get to decide the headlines for their stories. We have no information to evaluate whether the person who will write the headline has sufficient information about the story or not. If he does not, then this weakens the argument.
Option C - Incorrect
How other reporters have written stories and headlines for the same events is not relevant to evaluating the conclusion.
Option D - Incorrect
This can either strengthen or weaken the argument. If the number of people who know more than the reporter is limited, then the argument is strengthened. However, if the number is quite high, the argument is weakened since a lot of people now can relate to the headlines. Since, this does both, it is incorrect.
Option E - Correct answer
If the editor wants people who have read the stories to recognize the headline as clever, there is no point in letting the reporters choose the headlines as they allude to information that does appear in the story.
Headlines that reporters write allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but does not appear explicitly in the story --> Editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories
let us take a look at the answer options given --
Option A - Incorrect
If the reporter is better placed than the editor to judge the story's most newsworthy features, then probably the editor should let the reporter decide on the headlines. This weakens the conclusion.
Option B - Incorrect
Not relevant as the argument is concerned about whether reporters should get to decide the headlines for their stories. We have no information to evaluate whether the person who will write the headline has sufficient information about the story or not. If he does not, then this weakens the argument.
Option C - Incorrect
How other reporters have written stories and headlines for the same events is not relevant to evaluating the conclusion.
Option D - Incorrect
This can either strengthen or weaken the argument. If the number of people who know more than the reporter is limited, then the argument is strengthened. However, if the number is quite high, the argument is weakened since a lot of people now can relate to the headlines. Since, this does both, it is incorrect.
Option E - Correct answer
If the editor wants people who have read the stories to recognize the headline as clever, there is no point in letting the reporters choose the headlines as they allude to information that does appear in the story.
hello experts
my concern is what is the inference of word " clever" here used multiple times in the argument and in the correct answer choice."while they are clever , what makes them clever is" couldn't understand the phrase"
my concern is what is the inference of word " clever" here used multiple times in the argument and in the correct answer choice."while they are clever , what makes them clever is" couldn't understand the phrase"
sidagar
Ok what makes them clever?
If you write explicitly in the headlines say " an earthquake at xyz place killed 8 people" this explained headlines gives a clear information and most of the people wont be interested in reading the whole story. A clever reporter wont write such explicit info in the headline cuz he/she wants he reader to read the whole story
argument says that editor should not let reporter to write a headline because reporter knows the story. The right choice says that editor wants a kind of headline that doesn't give the whole information to the reader and so for that a clever reporter is a must.
here is my analysis
conclusion : editors should not allow reporters to write headlines
premise:even though headlines reporters write are clever , what typically makes them clever - lost as could not understand the meaning
would appreciate your analysis.Also is this from official guide 2018
conclusion : editors should not allow reporters to write headlines
premise:even though headlines reporters write are clever , what typically makes them clever - lost as could not understand the meaning
would appreciate your analysis.Also is this from official guide 2018
Luckisnoexcuse
Current Student
Joined: 18 Aug 2016
Last visit: 31 Mar 2026
Posts: 510
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Schools: Kenan-Flagler '20 (M)
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 740 Q51 V38
Products:
GMATNinja
GMATNinja
Understood why E is more appropriate than other options...but not able to reject option D.. can you throw some light...
Luckisnoexcuse
Quote:
Choice (D) does not provide any information suggesting that reporters should not be allowed to write headlines for their own stories, so it does not directly support the conclusion. Furthermore, Choice (D) does not tell us anything about the cleverness of reporters' headlines and thus does not strengthen the argument used in the passage.
Since choice (D) does not support the conclusion or the evidence cited in the passage, it can be eliminated.
_________________
GMAT/GRE/EA tutors @ www.gmatninja.com | YouTube | Articles | IG
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
I narrowed this question down to B and E and ended up picking B over E
I negated B -> if one did not need a sufficient understanding of the story to write a clever headline, then anyone (including editors) could write a clever headline. This would weaken the conclusion if true. Therefore, the opposite would strengthen the conclusion. Further, the premise states that the clever headlines "allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter." Therefore, if one did not have knowledge of the story, how would one be able to write a clever headline?
I saw several people mention B as a weakener, not a strengthener. Can anyone care to elaborate further? Thanks
I negated B -> if one did not need a sufficient understanding of the story to write a clever headline, then anyone (including editors) could write a clever headline. This would weaken the conclusion if true. Therefore, the opposite would strengthen the conclusion. Further, the premise states that the clever headlines "allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter." Therefore, if one did not have knowledge of the story, how would one be able to write a clever headline?
I saw several people mention B as a weakener, not a strengthener. Can anyone care to elaborate further? Thanks
jwang1191
First of all, just because negating a statement makes it a weakener, does not necessarily make that statement a strengthener. Regardless, the conclusion here is that "newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories". The reason is NOT that reporters write clever headlines. The reason is that very few readers would be able to appreciate and understand those headlines, so the cleverness of the reporters' headlines would be wasted.
Saying that anyone can write clever headlines does not weaken the conclusion. If anything, it suggests that editors do not have to rely on the reporters themselves to write clever headlines. Choice (B) could potentially be seen as a weakener - you could argue that a reporter is more likely to have a sufficient understanding of the story and thus perhaps more capable of writing a clever headline. But that logic only really works if we assume that the headlines SHOULD be clever. If the headlines don't have to be clever, then such a "sufficient" understanding of the story might not be necessary to write an acceptable headline.
Refer to this post for an explanation of the correct answer.
I hope that helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE/EA tutors @ www.gmatninja.com | YouTube | Articles | IG
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
gocoder
Joined: 19 Oct 2014
Last visit: 02 Nov 2019
Posts: 27
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: WP Carey" 20 (WD) Owen '20 (WD) Rotman '20 (WD) Schulich Jan 18 Intake (WD) McDonough '20 (WD) McCombs '20 (WD) Boston U '20 (WD) Duke '20 (D) Queen's 19 Desautels '20 (S)
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 2: 670 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.26
WE:Operations (Manufacturing)
Schools: WP Carey" 20 (WD) Owen '20 (WD) Rotman '20 (WD) Schulich Jan 18 Intake (WD) McDonough '20 (WD) McCombs '20 (WD) Boston U '20 (WD) Duke '20 (D) Queen's 19 Desautels '20 (S)
GMAT 2: 670 Q49 V31
Posts: 27
GMATNinja
How will the most readers not appreciate if the reporters do mention 'little known information'as a part of headlines and not mention in the story ?
What you wrote above makes me feel as you it is contrary to the information in stimulus(in quotes below). Please help me understand.
"what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself."
gocoder
Just because the headlines ALLUDE to the little known information does not mean that most readers will understand the headline.
Imagine that a physicist were to give a televised speech and make several clever jokes about string theory. In order to get the jokes, you have to understand string theory. However, most of the viewers do NOT understand string theory. So even though the jokes might be clever, the only people who get the jokes are the very few people who understand string theory. Just because the physicist ALLUDES to string theory in the speech does not mean that most people will suddenly understand string theory or the joke. And if the physicist never explains the relevant theory in the speech, then most people will listen to the speech without understanding any of the jokes.
Similarly, the headlines written by the reporters are often clever, but most of the readers cannot understand or appreciate why they are clever even after reading the story. They didn't know the necessary information before reading, and they don't know it after reading. In other words, unless you happen to already know the "little-known information" that the reporter knows, you will not recognize the headline as clever, even after reading the entire story.
I hope that helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE/EA tutors @ www.gmatninja.com | YouTube | Articles | IG
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
arvind910619
This reasoning is the most correct in my opinion.
For example: A reporter covered a story where a very precious diamond of national heritage was stolen from International museum in United States. Being a reporter, he overheard the FBI agents at the crime scene talking that the diamond was stolen by N.Korea. Now imagine that the reporter writes the headline as "Can a diamond cause World War 3?" He already has raised curiosity in reader's mind with such a headline but unfortunately the story that he covered was published accurately and thus, had no mention of any such statement about world war.
Would not this allusion at the headline disappoint the readers after they have had read the entire story? As a result, the reputation of the newspaper company will be compromised. Hence the newspaper editors would want the kind of headlines that is appreciated or probably called as clever by the readers after they have had read the story.
In this case, headlines that the editors would want can probably be - "States loses a cultural heritage".
Conclusion: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories.
Premise: The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.
First let me explain why I rejected E:
E says "The kind of headlines that newspaper editors want are those that anyone who has read a reporter's story in its entirety will recognize as clever". From the argument we can see that the headlines are clever when "they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself." So, this option means that the readers of the newspaper will be able to understand that the reporter has little information about the story and hence consider the headline to be "clever" and this is what the editor wants. This clearly weakens the argument because the editors would like to have headlines which do not "allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.". This in a way weakens the argument.
I chose B and here's why:
Choice B says "To write a headline that is clever, a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies.". Now we can clearly take this as an assumption to arrive at the conclusion. Though, again "clever" has been used here as well, it is compensated by the second part of the choice "a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies". I believed that this is a better choice.
Please explain where am I going wrong
Premise: The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.
First let me explain why I rejected E:
E says "The kind of headlines that newspaper editors want are those that anyone who has read a reporter's story in its entirety will recognize as clever". From the argument we can see that the headlines are clever when "they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself." So, this option means that the readers of the newspaper will be able to understand that the reporter has little information about the story and hence consider the headline to be "clever" and this is what the editor wants. This clearly weakens the argument because the editors would like to have headlines which do not "allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.". This in a way weakens the argument.
I chose B and here's why:
Choice B says "To write a headline that is clever, a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies.". Now we can clearly take this as an assumption to arrive at the conclusion. Though, again "clever" has been used here as well, it is compensated by the second part of the choice "a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies". I believed that this is a better choice.
Please explain where am I going wrong
aviejay
aviejay, thank you for explaining your thought process! I think I see where you went wrong...
As stated in an earlier post, the headlines written by reporters are only clever because they refer to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter. If that information is little-known AND if the reporter does not mention that information in the story, then we can infer that most readers will not know that same information. Since the readers do not know that information, they will not be able to appreciate the clever headlines.
In other words, according to the author, the problem with headlines written by reporters is that most people, even after reading the story, will NOT be able to appreciate the clever headlines. But what if editors are okay with that? Maybe the editors prefer headlines whose cleverness is only appreciated by a small portion of readers. If that were the case, then the editors SHOULD allow reporters to write their own headlines.
Choice (E) assures us that this is not the case. Editors want headlines whose cleverness will be appreciated by ANYONE who has read the entire story. The cleverness of headlines written by reporters is only appreciated by a small portion of readers. So, if (E) is true, then editors would NOT want headlines to be written by the reporters. Thus, (E) strengthens the argument.
Choice (B), on the other hand, could actually be used against the author's argument. The reporter who wrote the story would surely have a sufficient understanding of his/her own story. If (B) is true, then a sufficient understanding of the story is a necessary condition for being able to write a clever headline. The reporter would meet this condition, so (B) suggests that the reporter would be qualified to write a clever headline.
At best, choice (B) does not affect the argument (surely the editors could find other people, besides the reporters, with sufficient understanding of the story). But (B) does not strengthen the argument. (E) is a better choice.
I hope that helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE/EA tutors @ www.gmatninja.com | YouTube | Articles | IG
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
HimanshuW11
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Last visit: 24 Sep 2018
Posts: 62
Location: India
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, Strategy
GMAT 1: 620 Q41 V34
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
GMAT 1: 620 Q41 V34
Posts: 62
Quote:
Conclusion: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories.
Support: The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story
So may be it doesn't sound clever to the people who read it.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
Quote:
This is exactly opposite to what the argument suggests. Hence it goes out.
Quote:
The reporter who owns the story is definitely has the understanding of the story, but the conclusion of the argument refrains them from writing the headline of their own story.
Quote:
Out of scope. Other reporters aren't the matter of concern here in this argument.
Quote:
Certainly there would be such people. But firstly thy haven't been discussed by the argument. Secondly, we don't know what information would those people allude to if they would write the headlines. If they would be able to make clever headlines. Insufficient. Goes Out.
Quote:
This hits the bulls eye. They newspaper editors want those kind of headline that is considered clever by someone who has read the story in its entirety. This strengthen the claim that Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories as they allude to little known information.
theeni03
Joined: 29 Jul 2017
Last visit: 01 Jun 2023
Posts: 39
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Schools: ISB '21 (A)
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
GPA: 3.94
WE:Management Consulting (Consulting)
Products:
GMATNinja
Thanks for the wonderful explanation.
Could you explain to me how I can determine the logical antecedent of 'them' in "what typically makes them clever"?
Moderators:
Announcements
Tuck at Dartmouth
AI at Dartmouth Tuck: How the School Is Preparing Leaders for the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Inside the courses, research, and hands-on learning defining wise, decisive leadership in an AI-driven world.
Read More
Inside the courses, research, and hands-on learning defining wise, decisive leadership in an AI-driven world.
Read More
Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos
Success stories and strategies from high-scoring candidates.