#23 - Magazine editor: I know that some of our regular

[ashpine17]

Am i not supposed to pick a choice based off of what fits my pre phrase exactly i took out c precisely because it did not match exactly i predicted one assumption would be was that it mattered that the magazine maintain its advertising power like it was more important than giving a good word to products and c didnt seem to match that exactly

[kristinajohnson@berkeley.edu]

Part 1: "I know that some of our regular advertisers have been pressuring us to give favorable mention to their products in our articles,"

Part 2: (Conclusion): "but they should realize that for us to yield to their wishes would actually be against their interests."

Part 3: "To remain an effective advertising vehicle we must have loyal readership,"

Part 4: "and we would soon lose that readership if our readers suspect that our editorial integrity has been compromised by pandering to advertisers [favorable mention]."



1: favorable mention

2: (Conclusion): against their interests

3: effective advertising then readership (NOT readership then NOT effective advertising)

4: if [favorable mention] then NOT readership (then NOT effective) (adding part 4 to part 3 via contrapositive)

effective then readership then NOT favorable mention to their products in our articles

against their interests



If favorable mention then NOT interests (NOT readership then NOT effective)

If favorable mention then NOT readership then NOT effective (NOT interests)

So, is the link that needs to be established (assumption) between NOT readership then NOT effective and NOT interests?


Correct answer choice C, "Favorable mention of their products in the magazine’s articles is of less value to the advertisers than is the continued effectiveness of the magazine as an advertising vehicle."

Negated: Effectiveness (then readership (interests)) less important favorable mention more important

Favorable mention less important effectiveness (then readership (interests)) more important


If favorable mention then against their interests (If interests then NOT favorable mention)

If favorable mention then NOT readership then NOT effective (If effective then readership then NOT favorable mention)

The stimulus is saying if you have favorable mention then you can't have effective/readership/interests so if you want a magazine you don't want favorable mention, a magazine is more important than favorable mention.


I think this is an okay way to check my understand of the question and answer. Just wondering if this is correct?

[kristinajohnson@berkeley.edu]

I forgot to include (in my previous post) my main problem! I don't see how answer choice C bridged effectiveness and interests?

Answer choice C summarized: Favorable mention less important effectiveness more important

Last sentence in the stimulus combined in a chain via the contrapositive: If favorable mention (pandering to advertisers) then NOT readership (then NOT effective)

effective then readership then NOT favorable mention

The conclusion (NOT interests) true then the assumption (NOT readership then NOT effective) valid

effective then readership (true) then interests (valid)

So, because the answer choice is saying effectiveness is more important we can be sure that the if effective then readership relationship is true and therefore the conclusion (interests) is valid?

Thank you!

[Dana D]

Hey Kristina,

Following the same structure I outlined in your other assumption post -

The conclusion is that catering to these advertisers is against their best interest.

Why?

Because to remain an effective advertising vehicle the magazine needs to maintain editorial integrity.

So there's a gap here in the logic - what if the advertisers don't care about the magazine being an enduring effective advertising vehicle? What if they want to get one good run of ads in and then switch to radio ads? We need a way to bridge these ideas.

Answer choice (C) does this by saying the advertisers must also value the enduring effectiveness of the magazine over short term favorable ads. If this is true, it makes sense for the author to conclude that catering to the advertisers is actually against their best interest we now know that their interest is in the mag enduring as an advertising vehicle!

So with assumption questions, in addition to the negation technique, you can also try taking an answer choice and applying it to the stimulus, like we just did here, and seeing if it acts as a supporter for the conclusion by filling in an obvious gap in the logic. Linking another blog about assumption questions here for you to read through too: https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/powers ... he-day-10/

Hope that helps!