Journalists often claim that their investigation of the private lives of political leaders is an effort to improve society by forcing the powerful to conform to the same standards of conduct as the less powerful. In reality, however, the tactic is detrimental to society. It makes public figures more concerned with mere appearances, and makes everyone else cynical about the character of their leaders.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
While journalists argue that their investigations of the private lives of political leaders improves society, it is actually detrimental to society. This is because it makes public figures more concerned with appearances and makes everyone else cynical about their leaders.
Identify Argument Part
The argument part refers to the position that journalists often claim. The author then says that position has bad consequences.
A
It is a claim that the argument attempts to refute.
This is incorrect because the author is not refuting that journalists view their investigations as an effort to hold the powerful to the same standards as less powerful citizens. The author is merely saying that effort has negative consequences.
B
It mentions a justification that is sometimes offered for a practice that, the argument concludes, has undesirable consequences.
This is correct because the argument part mentions the journalists’ justification for their practice of investigating the private lives of politicians. The author then concludes this investigating has negative consequences.
C
It is cited as evidence often given for an assertion that the argument concludes is false.
This is incorrect because the author isn’t concluding that journalists are wrong to assert that their investigations are an effort to hold the powerful and less powerful to the same standards. The author is merely arguing that practice has other, bad consequences.
D
It describes a phenomenon that, according to the argument, is much less damaging to society than journalists often assume.
This is incorrect because the author actually argues that the phenomenon is more damaging than what journalists assume.
E
It gives an example of a phenomenon that the argument contends has very different effects from those it is generally assumed by everyone to have.
This is incorrect because we don’t know whether or not it is generally assumed by everyone that journalists’ investigations into the private lives of politicians will have the positive effects journalists claim.