#12 - Many people say that the press should not pry into the

[JulesC]

Hello,

I got this question correct but I'm struggling to completely understand the logic in it. I see that the basic logic is the right to publish something = the obligation to publish something = a clear interest on behalf of the public for this information. Is that last part correct? Does it serve any useful purpose for the sake of answering this question or is it only an assumption being made by the author?

Thanks,

Julienne Chebat

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Julienne!

You are correct that the flaw here is that the author jumps from the idea that the press has a right to publish a story of interest to the public to the press has an obligation to publish it. That last part you added about the obligation to publish equaling the information is of interest to the public is not quite right, however. "For" is a premise indicator so the last clause of the last sentence is actually just a premise that the author is using to support the conclusion.

Basically the structure of the argument looks like this:

Premise: Interest to the public (and not libelous) Press has right to publish
Premise: Stories about private individuals Interest to the public.
Conclusion: Stories about private individuals (and not libelous) Press has obligation to publish

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey