Self-study
Commentator: Recently, articles criticizing the environmental movement have been appearing regularly in newspapers. █████████ ██ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ███ ██ ████ ██ ██ █████████████████ ████ █████ ███ █████ ██ ██ █ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ █████████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ ████ ████ ████ ██ █████████ ██████████ █████████ ██████████ ██ ██ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ██ ███ █████████████████ ██████ ██████ ███████ ████ ████ ██ █████████ ███ █████████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ████████████████ ██ ██ ██ █████ ███████████ █████████ ███ █████████████████████ ███ ██████ █████ ██ ██ ███████████ ███████ ████ ████ ███ ████ █████████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██ ██████████
Summary
Winslow believes that articles criticizing the environmental movement have been appearing in newspapers due to the desire of newspaper editors for articles that seem to challenge prevailing political positions. The commentator concedes that editors like to run antienvironmental pieces primarily because they like to challenge prevailing positions. But the commentator asserts that, despite what news editors might think, environmentalism isn’t actually the prevailing position.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Newspaper editors are selecting some stories on the basis of an inaccurate understanding of what is a prevailing position.
At least some people have an inaccurate understanding about the prevalence of serious environmentalism.
12.
The commentator's statements, if true, ████ ████████ ███████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ██████████
a
Winslow is correct █████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████████ ███████ ███ █████████████ █████████
Strongly supported. The commentator acknowledges that editors like to run antienvironmental pieces because they like to challenge what they perceive to be prevailing positions. This preference can be characterized as a preference for “controversial” pieces.
b
Critics of environmentalism ████ ███ ████████████ ████████ ██████████ ██ ██████████
Unsupported. The commentator asserts that antienvironmentalists are not actually dissidents, “however much they may have succeeded” in selling themselves as renegades. This acknowledges the critics may have succeeded in portraying themselves as renegades.
c
Winslow's explanation is ███ █████████ ████ ███ █████████ ████ █████ █████████ ██ ████████████████ ███ ██████████
Unsupported. The commentator supports Winslow’s explanation about why newspaper editors have regularly published antienvironmentalist pieces. So, the stimulus doesn’t support a claim that the explanation is inconsistent with anything.
d
The position attacked ██ ███████ ██ ████████████████ ██ ████████ ███ ██████████ █████████ █████████
Antisupported. The commentator says that serious environmentalism is not the prevailing position. So, the position attacked by critics of environmentalism is not the prevailing position.
e
Serious environmentalism will ██████████ ██████ █ ██████████ █████████ █████████
Unsupported. The commentator doesn’t say anything about the future of serious environmentalism.