Self-study
Some critics claim that the power of the media to impose opinions upon people concerning the important issues of the day is too great. ███ ████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ██ ██ █████ ██████ ███ █████ ████████ █ █████ ██ ███████ ████████ ████ ████ █████ █████ █████████ ██ ██████ ███ ████ ████ ████ ██████████ ██ ██████ █████ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ██ ██████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that the media does not have excessive power to impose opinions, contrary to the view of some critics. His support is that, if the media purveyed an overly narrow range of opinion, that would be sufficient for it to impose opinions. But it doesn’t purvey an overly narrow range of opinion. 
Identify and Describe Flaw
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing sufficiency and necessity. The author argues that, because a sufficient condition (overly restricted opinion) isn’t true, its necessary condition (imposing opinions) couldn’t be true. This is flawed reasoning, because only the absence of a necessary condition (not a sufficient condition) can tell you that something can’t be true.
Consider the analogous argument: “If this food was an orange, it would be a fruit. It’s not an orange, so it can’t be a fruit.” This is fallacious, because even though being an orange is enough to make something a fruit, not all fruits are oranges.
14.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ █ █████████ ████ ██ ███ █████████
a
The argument launches █ ████████ ██████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██████ ████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ████ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ██████
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of ad hominem. It isn’t applicable here, because there is no personal attack; the author provides a substantive argument.
b
The argument takes ███ ███████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ████████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ █ ████ █████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ██████ ██ ███ ████
The author would be taking this for granted if he were to assume it was true without actually stating it. He explicitly says that it is true, so he isn’t taking it for granted.
c
The argument takes ███ ███████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ █████ ███████ ███ █████ ██ █ ██████ ██████ ████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ █████ █████ ██████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ██████
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing necessary and sufficient conditions (see diagram above). The author argues that a sufficient condition doesn’t apply, so its necessary condition doesn’t apply either. But that doesn’t follow logically.
d
The argument, instead ██ █████████ ████████ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ███████████ █████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████ ████████
The author’s conclusion is about people’s opinions, but he doesn’t appeal to popular opinion. That would be if he’d said that many people believe this conclusion is true, so therefore it must be true.
e
The argument takes ███ ███████ ████ ██ ██ █████████ ███ █ ████ █████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ██████ ██ ███ ███ ██ ███████ █████ █████████
The author never says that it is desirable to have a wide range of opinion—he only says that there is in fact a wide range of opinion.