Subscription pricing
Essayist: Support Politicians deserve protection from a prying press. ██ ███ █████ ███ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██████ ██████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████████ ████████████ ███ ███████ █████████ █████ ██ ████████████ ███████ █████ █████████ ████████ ██████ ████ ████████ █ ██████ ██ ████████ ███ █████ █████████ ████ █████████ ████ ███ ████ █████ █████ ███████ ███ ██████ ███ ███████████████ ███████████ █████ ██ ██████ █████████ ██ ██ ████ ██ ███ █ ████ ██ ████ ███████ ███████████
Summarize Argument
The essayist concludes that the press should stop writing about politicians’ private lives. This is for three reasons: no one wants their private lives to be published, the threat of an exposed private life makes politics as a career unattractive, and the practice makes reporters behave poorly. These reasons support the sub-conclusion that politicians deserve protection from intrusive media.
Notable Assumptions
The essayist assumes that there are no benefits to an intrusive press that would be lost if this intrusiveness was stopped—maybe the threat of an intrusive press weeds out candidates who aren’t serious about the job. Furthermore, the essayist assumes that a politician’s personal life can be separated from his professional life enough to report on the latter without discussing the former.
4.
Each of the following, if █████ ███████████ ███ ██████████ ████████ ███████
a
The press is █████████ ██████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██████
b
Reporting on politicians' ███████ █████ █████████ ██████ ████ ████ █████████ ██████ ██ █ █████████
c
Much writing on ████████████ ███████ █████ ████████ ██ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███████████
d
In recent elections, ███ ████ █████ ███████████ ████ ███████ ██ ███ ███ ████████ ██████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██ █████ █████████
e
Politicians' personality flaws █████ ██████████ ██████ █████ ███████████ ██ ███ ████