#9 - The journalistic practice of fabricating remarks after

[dshen123]

Sorry! I'm trying to understand E. Is this what E says?
E: opponent says "sometimes it's ok for people to use their own words" as
conclusive proof that "people using their own words" is never inappropriate?

opponent: people's spoken remarks rarely convey ideas as
clearly as ...by a skilled writer.

When the opponents says that people's spoken remarks "rarely occurs", can I interpret that as sometimes skilled writer convey ideasmore appropriately than people's spoken remarks? I was confused about answer choice E. Thank you!

Also, why is it a "either/or" situation? I thought the stem merely concludes with "this other practice is defensible". Plz help.

[Luke Haqq]

Hi dshen123!

We can substitute language into (E) to give it a bit more substance, so that it'd read, "using the opponent's admission that a practice [fabricating remarks and putting them in quotation marks] is sometimes appropriate as conclusive proof that that practice [fabricating remarks] is never inappropriate.

This doesn't quite occur in the stimulus. The author doesn't go from a "sometimes" in the premises to an "always" in the conclusion. Rather, the author of the stimulus is saying that this practice is "entirely defensible" because the practice "avoids the more serious misrepresentation that would occur." So there's a definite reason for the author that leads to a definite conclusion.