Editorialist: Many professional musicians claim that unauthorized music-sharing services, which allow listeners to obtain music for free, rob musicians of royalties. █████ ██ ██ ████ ████ █████████ ███ ████████ ██ █████████ ████ ████████ █████████████ ████████ ███ ███ ██ █████ █████ ██████ ██████████ ███████████ █████████ ███ █████ ██████████████ ████ ██ ███████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ████████ ████ █████ ██████
The editorialist claims that unauthorized music-sharing services are not responsible for depriving musicians of their deserved earnings because other parties also take a cut of the musicians’ earnings.
The argument is flawed because it only shows that other parties (record companies, publishers, managers, etc.) are also responsible for taking money from musicians, but never actually absolves unauthorized sharing services of blame. It’s still entirely possible that these sharing services, like the other parties mentioned, are robbing musicians.
The reasoning in the editorialist's ████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ████████
concludes that one █████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██████ ███████ ███████ █████ ██ ███████████
attempts to promote █ ██████████ ████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ████ ████ ██████ ██████ ██ ████ ████████
attacks a position █████ ██████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ████ ████ ████████
tries to show ████ █ ████████ ██ █████ ██████ ██ ████████ ███ ██ ███████████ ███████████ ██ ███████ ████ ████████
treats a necessary █████████ ███ ███████████████ ██ ██████ ██ ████ █ ██████████ █████████ ███ ███████████████