Consumer advocate: Under the current absence of government standards

Question

Consumer advocate:  Under the current absence of government standards for food product labeling, manufacturers are misleading or deceiving consumers by their product labeling. For example, a certain brand of juice is labeled “fresh orange juice,” yet the product is made from water, concentrate, and flavor enhancers. Since “fresh” as applied to food products is commonly understood to mean pure and unprocessed, labeling that orange juice “fresh” is unquestionably deceptive.

Manufacturer:  Using words somewhat differently than they are commonly used is not deceptive. After all, “fresh” can also mean never frozen. We cannot be faulted for failing to comply with standards that have not been officially formulated. When the government sets clear standards pertaining to product labeling, we will certainly comply with them.

Which one of the following principles, if established, would contribute most to a defense of the manufacturer’s position against that of the consumer advocate?

(A) In the absence of government definitions for terms used in product labeling, common standards of understanding alone should apply.

(B) Government standards for truthful labeling should always be designed to reflect common standards of understanding.

(C) People should be free, to the extent that it is legal to do so, to exploit to their advantages the inherent ambiguity and vagueness in language.

(D) When government standards and common standards for truthful labeling are incompatible with each other, the government standards should always take precedence.

(E) In their interpretation of language, consumers should never presume that vagueness indicates an attempt to deceive on the part of manufacturers unless those manufacturers would reap large benefits from successful deception.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

(A) No. This contradicts the manufacturer’s claim: “ Using words somewhat differently than they are commonly used is not deceptive .”

(B) No. This contradicts the manufacturer’s claim: “ Using words somewhat differently than they are commonly used is not deceptive. ”

(C) Yes.  “ Manufacturer: Using words somewhat differently than they are commonly used is not deceptive…. We cannot be faulted for failing to comply with standards that have not been officially formulated. ”

(D) No. Incompatibility between government standards and common standards for truthful labeling is not discussed in the passage.

(E) No. This does not address the manufacturer’s claim that “ We cannot be faulted for failing to comply with standards that have not been officially formulated. ”

sobby · Answer

I will go with C here ..
It supports the manufacturer point of view ...one can exploit the language , if doing so is legal ...

NarendraM · Answer

I think A also fits. Not sure why there should be a preference to C just because its more assertive.

Sanjeetgujrall · Answer

Yes i think its C

AS20 · Answer

How B option is ruled out when it supports the manufacturer’s position?

kunalsinghNS · Answer

(B) Government standards for truthful labeling should always be designed to reflect common standards of understanding.

This option cannot support manufacturer stand point.
if we consider the consumer advocate procedure he says "fresh means unprocessed" where as manufacturer says "it never mean unfrozen" 
I believe the manufacturer agrees with the consumer advocate but provides a conclusion that favors the manufacturer. 
So i short option (B) supports the consumer advocate more than the manufacturer.

kunalsinghNS · Answer

common standards relates to consumer advocate's argument since the manufacturer doesn't refute the consumer advocate in his argument instead he provides a different explaination.

hence, option A is more inclined towards the consumer advocate than the manufacturer.

devanshu92 · Answer

I would also go with A. It states that in absence of Government rules, common sense can be used which is in favour of Manufacturer.

C option is also close one. But I rejected it because gives a negative impression in manufacturer's say.

Hence A is correct according to me

Sent from my XT1706 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

nairaneesh · Answer

I feel D is correct because questions ask for "Which one of the following principles, if established, ", D is the one which establishes such a rule and supports the argument and avoids the ambiguity.

(A) seems to be incorrect because it talks about "Common standards in the absence", the entire argument itself is based on missing a common standard.
(C) seems incorrect because manufacturer argues that there is no deception from their side, they merely assumed another meaning of "Fresh", so C contradict wit that.

Samanway · Answer

Why not option E ?! It refutes the accusation of the consumer advocate that vagueness doesn't necessarily mean deception.

guptakashish02 · Answer

Hi  broall 
If u have OE for this question, please post it. This was a tough question.

Thanks

Skywalker18 · Answer

Consumer advocate:  Under the current absence of government standards for food product labeling, manufacturers are misleading or deceiving consumers by their product labeling. For example, a certain brand of juice is labeled “fresh orange juice,” yet the product is made from water, concentrate, and flavor enhancers. Since “fresh” as applied to food products is commonly understood to mean pure and unprocessed, labeling that orange juice “fresh” is unquestionably deceptive.

Manufacturer:  Using words somewhat differently than they are commonly used is not deceptive. After all, “fresh” can also mean never frozen. We cannot be faulted for failing to comply with standards that have not been officially formulated. When the government sets clear standards pertaining to product labeling, we will certainly comply with them.

Consumer Advocate:
Core- This product is deceptively labeled because "Fresh" is commonly understood to mean pure and unprocessed but this product is not.

Manufacturer:
Core: The product is not deceptively labeled because "Fresh" can also mean "never frozen"

Which one of the following principles, if established, would contribute most to a defense of the manufacturer’s position against that of the consumer advocate?

(A) In the absence of government definitions for terms used in product labeling, common standards of understanding alone should apply.-- opposite - this goes against the manufacturer's position

(B) Government standards for truthful labeling should always be designed to reflect common standards of understanding. -- irrelevant- If government standards come in the future, the manufacturer will comply

(C) People should be free, to the extent that it is legal to do so, to exploit to their advantages the inherent ambiguity and vagueness in language. - Correct; This is what the manufacturer does 'Using words somewhat differently than they are commonly used is not deceptive'

(D) When government standards and common standards for truthful labeling are incompatible with each other, the government standards should always take precedence. - irrelevant; If government standards come in the future, the manufacturer will comply

(E) In their interpretation of language, consumers should never presume that vagueness indicates an attempt to deceive on the part of manufacturers unless those manufacturers would reap large benefits from successful deception.- incorrect; Firstly we are not provided enough information to determine whether these manufacturers have reaped large benefits. If these manufacturers have indeed reaped large benefits, then this goes against the manufacturer's claim

Answer C

AkashM · Answer

CA: Labeling fresh is deceptive. 
M: Fresh has multiple meanings. When government tells me which one to use I will use that.

The questions asks us to defend M against CA.

A. In the absence of government definitions for terms used in product labeling, common standards of understanding alone should apply. -  M doesn't want to use 'Fresh' in the commonly meant way since there is no directive from govt. on how to use that word.

(B) Government standards for truthful labeling should always be designed to reflect common standards of understanding. -  M really don't want to talk about abstracts here.

(C) People should be free, to the extent that it is legal to do so, to exploit to their advantages the inherent ambiguity and vagueness in language. -  M does say that, I will do what I want to do until the govt. tells me not to do it. This is what we are looking for.

(D) When government standards and common standards for truthful labeling are incompatible with each other, the government standards should always take precedence. -  M is not a judge to decide who wins a conflict. He only gives a damn about his juice!

(E) In their interpretation of language, consumers should never presume that vagueness indicates an attempt to deceive on the part of manufacturers unless those manufacturers would reap large benefits from successful deception. -  Consumers who?? We are talking about M here.

Hope this helps!

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Consumer advocate: Under the current absence of government standards

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

Consumer advocate: Under the current absence of government standards

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