Q15 - Journalism's purpose is to inform people

[mshinners]

Question Type:
Inference (Fill-In)

Stimulus Breakdown:
Papers are supposed to inform people on important stuff. However, people often buy papers because of celebrity gossip (which isn't important). This sensationalism is…

Answer Anticipation:
The gossip isn't included to hit the papers' purpose. Since the stimulus states that people buy the papers for the gossip, a good way to combine these two statements is to say that the gossip is included to drive sales.

Correct answer:
(A)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Bam! Right off the bat. This gossip can't fulfill journalism's purpose, so it must be included for some other reason. I picked a specific purpose in my prephrase, and this answer is more generic, but it serves the same purpose as what I was looking for.

(B) Degree. A newspaper can contain both useful information and celebrity gossip. "prevents" is too strong.

(C) Unwarranted comparison. The stimulus doesn't talk about today vs. the past.

(D) If anything, opposite. It seems as if the gossip is there to entertain/titillate while possibly trying to slip some important information to the reader.

(E) Degree. If it gets people to buy the paper and read the informational section, the gossip could serve a purpose. "[N]o purpose" is too strong.

Takeaway/Pattern:
Be flexible in answers! If you predicted something specific but you get a more general answer, be willing to at least leave it on your first pass.

#officialexplanation

[KristenW551]

"(E) Degree. If it gets people to buy the paper and read the informational section, the gossip could serve a purpose. "[N]o purpose" is too strong."

That explanation works if E said, "is of no value to newspapers and tv news programs" but it says no value to people interested in journalism.

I still don't understand how E can be ruled out. IMO the argument is about journalism and what it is.

[DPCTE4325]

"(E) Degree. If it gets people to buy the paper and read the informational section, the gossip could serve a purpose. "[N]o purpose" is too strong."

That explanation works if E said, "is of no value to newspapers and tv news programs" but it says no value to people interested in journalism.

I still don't understand how E can be ruled out. IMO the argument is about journalism and what it is.

Just for posterity my prephrase was "Obviously, then, the sensationalistic gossip contained in newspapers and television news programs DO NOT serve/carry out journalism's purpose" but this wasn't an answer.

I think you were tempted by E as I was if you had a similar pre phrase. But E is not saying the same thing and it baits you into thinking it does. E talks about people who are interested in journalism, and we cannot properly infer that sensationalistic gossip is of NO value to them. We know that sensationalistic gossip is no of no value to journalim's purpose per the stimulus, but we cannot say the same for people "who are interested in journalism". Who's to say these don't also derive value from sensationalistic gossip on the weekend?

B (imo the other tricky answer) again is tricky with my pre phrase. Similarly though, I think we can safely infer that sensationstlic gossip doesn't achieve/carry out journalism's purpose, but that's it! B takes it out of bounds and says sensationalistic gossip PREVENTS news media from achieving journalistic purpose, and we don't know that. I don't think sensationalistic gossip prevents news media from achieving their journalistic purposes since clearly there are still people who buy newspapers to stay informed (i.e., purpose).