#13 - Journalists sometimes use historical photographs to

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Justify the Conclusion. The correct answer choice is (B)

Here we are told of the press’ use of historical photos as illustrations of current events. According to the author, such use overstates the similarity between past and present, and takes away from the perception of individual significance of current events.
The author concludes that by presenting new stories as mere repetitions of historical incidents, such journalists distort public understanding.

The question stem asks for the answer choice which enables this conclusion to be properly drawn. For a Justify the Conclusion question like this one, we should always try to prephrase. Where was the leap in logic found in the author’s argument? The author presumes that by using historical photos as modern illustrations and overstating similarities, this distorts public perception.

Answer choice (A): The conclusion regards distortion of public perceptions. Since this answer choice makes no reference to that concept, it cannot be the choice we seek—the one which links the rogue elements.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice, because it is the only one which links the rogue elements from the stimulus. Based on the fact that use of historic photos overstates the similarities, the author presumes the outcome to be a distortion of public perception.

Answer choice (C): Like incorrect answer choice (A) above, this choice fails to reference distortion of public opinion, so it cannot be the correct answer to this Justify the Conclusion question.

Answer choice (D): Like incorrect answer choices (A) and (C) above, this choice links the wrong elements, and cannot justify the conclusion because it fails to reference the distortion of public perception, a vital part of the author’s conclusion.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice may look enticing at first, but the problem is that it focuses only on the beliefs of the journalists. The author’s conclusion concerns the distortion of public perception based on these journalists’ use of historical photos—not based on the personal beliefs of the journalists.

[brittany1990]

Hi!

After reading the stimulus and question stem, I identified it as a justify the conclusion. I eliminated A,D, and E so I was left with B and C. I picked C but the correct answer is B. May you please explain why? I looked online at the explanations and it says that C is incorrect because it does not refer to the "distortion of public opinion" but it does say "distorts public understanding of the present."

Thank you,
Brittany

[Steve Stein]

Hey Brittany,

The author sets up this basic argument:

Premise: Photo recycling overstates the similarities between past and present, thereby denying individual events' significance.

Conclusion: Therefore, this use distorts public understanding of the present.

Since this stimulus is followed by a Justify question, the correct answer choice must link the conclusion above to one of the author's premises. Answer choice B does so, linking the similarity overstatement with the distortion of public understanding of the present.

Answer choice C provides a mistaken reversal of the correct answer choice. This choice provides that if a practice overstates past/present similarities, then it must deny the significance of individual events. This statement would not justify the reverse.

Tricky one! I hope that clears it up--let me know--thanks!

~Steve

[brittany1990]

AhHHHHH those mistaken reversals are little buggers! I understand it now, thanks!

Brittany

[MayaPapaya]

Can this be explained through conditional reasoning? I am having trouble diagramming this and finding the gap that way.

[Adam Tyson]

Yes and no, MayaPapaya. The argument is not itself conditional, but more causal, so we would not use conditional reasoning to diagram the stimulus. However, we can think of all Justify questions as having a conditional nature in that we want an answer that says something like "if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true." That's why Justify questions are also known as Sufficient Assumptions: the correct answer is sufficient to make the conclusion necessary!

As Steve explained, we should be looking for an that connects the premise about overstating similarities and denying individual significance to the conclusion about distorting public understanding. We need to say "IF you overstate and deny those things, THEN you distort public understanding." That's the conditional approach to Justify questions, whether the stimulus itself was conditional or not. Find that answer that makes the premises sufficient for the conclusion, and you have a winner!