QUESTION TEXT: Magazine editor: I know that some of our regular…
QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption
CONCLUSION: The editor concludes that the magazine will be less effective for advertisers if the articles start to mention the advertisers’ products.
REASONING: Readership would decline if readers began to suspect that editorial integrity had been compromised by pandering to advertisers.
ANALYSIS: The editor is assuming that readers actually will suspect that editorial integrity has been compromised.
___________
- The editor’s argument still works even if an editor has to occasionally be influenced in their duties by advertisers (e.g. Send them Christmas cards.)
- This is very tempting. But would the editor’s argument be wrecked if it were possible to mention a product once (but not twice) without compromising reputation?
It’s only necessary that the magazine couldn’t make a policy of repeatedly mentioning advertisers without compromising its reputation.
- CORRECT. Yes. The editor is arguing that mentioning the advertisers would actually be bad for the advertisers.
However it could be that the favorable mentions would be so valuable to advertisers that they outweigh the disadvantages of losing the magazine as an advertising vessel. Then the editor’s conclusion would be wrong. So this is necessary.
- Actually the editor’s argument is better if mentioning advertisers in articles doesn’t help advertisers very much.
- Even if carrying paid advertisement could sometimes pose a threat the editor still has a point. They have a loyal readership even though they take paid advertisements.
Recap: The question begins with “Magazine editor: I know that some of our regular”. It is a Necessary Assumption question. Learn how to master LSAT Necessary questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.
Leave a Reply