The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:
“Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument in question contains flaws that detract from its persuasiveness. The argument indicates a mistaken cause and effect fallacy in the cause of declining readership.
Regarding the issue of circulation decline, the only mentioned cause in the argument is the presence of a lower-priced newspaper. However, customers do not always follow their wallets. Other possible causes of this decline could be content irrelevance or that fewer people are reading newspapers. To find out for sure, more evidence is required around the reason why readers have chosen to no longer receive The Mercury newspaper, which would refute the argument if readers indicate a switch based on newspaper content, or around The Bugle’s readership and whether it has increased in a similar quantity compared to the circulation decline quantity experienced by The Mercury, which would refute the argument if readers are simply choosing to not receive any newspaper. Without further evidence, the assumption made in the argument remains poorly reasoned.
To summarize, the flaws in this argument make it unsound. This argument alone is not persuasive and will remain so without additional supporting evidence as specified above.