PT1.S4.Q13 -- press reports on political campaigns

DarklordDarklord Alum Member
edited January 2020 in Logical Reasoning 586 karma

Hi,
When I did this question, I got stuck between B and D, even after I used the negation technique for assumption questions. Why exactly is D here wrong?

For context, I thought D could be an answer too because when voters are paying enough attention to make informed decisions, then they don't need the press to cover substantial policy issues for them, and thus then they don't need the campaign advisors to stay out of the limelight.

Comments

  • noonawoonnoonawoon Alum Member ⭐
    3481 karma

    The problem with your answer choice is you are making too many leaps and assumptions. With a NA question type you want to choose the answer that makes the least amount of assumptions and, if negated, would wreck the argument.

    If the candidates in the election are not taking stances at all on issues, then you cannot argue that the press needs to report on their issues. There would be no issues to report on. (B)

    D is frankly not assumed by the argument at all. In fact, I would say D is an answer choice that weakens the argument. If you say that voters are not paying enough attention to make decisions either way, then why does it matter how the media reports on issues? The voters are off doing something else and ignoring the media

  • FindingSageFindingSage Alum Member ⭐
    2042 karma

    I used to struggle with necessary assumption questions. I kept picking sufficent assumption answers or trying to use the negation test unsuccessfully. Then, I recieved some advice that really changed things for me with this question type.

    Now when I see this question type all I ask is what has to be true?
    In order for the author/speaker to get from their premises to the conclusion what has to be true?

    I think if you strip this question away of all the extras and just see the argument you will be able to see easier why answer choice B has to be true.

    Premises: The press reports on the campaign advisers and not on the candidates.
    The voters are deprived of information that need to make informed decisions because the press is ignoring substantive policy issues and only reporting on the process of the campaign.

    Conclusion: It is clear that campaign advisers should stay out of the limelight and let the press report on the most revealing positions on substantive issues the candidates have taken.

    When you simplify the argument, can you see easier why Answer choice B must be true and answer choice D is not relevant to the conclusion?

    B). The candidates in the election are taking positions on substantive policy issues

    D). The voters are NOT paying enough attention to the election to be able to make informed decisions.

  • DarklordDarklord Alum Member
    586 karma

    Wow thank you for the awesome advice! Really appreciate it!

  • moonstars5678moonstars5678 Member
    166 karma

    I had difficulty understanding AC C - did it mean that how the media reports politics directly influences how politicians craft their policy positions?

    I had interpreted it to mean that the way the press reports politics is what determines what issues are talked about the most during campaign season, so that's why I had initially chosen it using the negation test: If the way media reports politics has little influence on voters, then the argument falls apart.

    help

Sign In or Register to comment.