LSAT Explanation PT 28, S3, Q17: In 1992, a major newspaper circulated

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following, if true about the newspaper in 1992, most seriously undermines the justification offered by the executive? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Weaken question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The executive of a major newspaper states that their reporters are paid lower average salaries than those at their principal competitors. However, the executive justifies this practice by arguing that any shortfall in the reporters' salaries is compensated by the valuable training they receive through their assignments. In this argument, the premise is that the reporters receive valuable training through their assignments, and the conclusion is that the lower salaries are justified because of this training.

Now, let's consider an "Evaluate" question for this argument: "Do the reporters still require significant training after working at the newspaper for an extended period of time?" The answer to this question would help us determine whether the argument is valid or not.

The question type of this problem is Weaken, so we are looking for the answer choice that most seriously undermines the justification offered by the executive.

Let's go through each answer choice:

a) Senior reporters at the newspaper earned as much as reporters of similar stature who worked for the newspaper's principal competitors.

- This answer choice does not weaken the argument, as it only addresses senior reporters and not the average salary of all reporters. It does not undermine the relationship between the premise (valuable training) and the conclusion (lower salaries are justified).

b) Most of the newspaper's reporters had worked there for more than ten years.

- This answer choice weakens the argument by suggesting that after working for more than ten years, reporters are less likely to need significant training. If most reporters have been with the company for an extended period, the value of the training they receive may not be enough to compensate for their lower salaries. This undermines the executive's justification for the lower salaries.

c) The circulation of the newspaper had recently reached a plateau, after it had increased steadily throughout the 1980s.

- This answer choice does not weaken the argument, as it is irrelevant to the relationship between the valuable training and the justification for lower salaries. The circulation of the newspaper does not directly impact the value of the training or the salaries of the reporters.

d) The union that represented reporters at the newspaper was different from the union that represented reporters at the newspaper's competitors.

- This answer choice also does not weaken the argument, as the union representation does not directly impact the relationship between the valuable training and the justification for lower salaries. It is unrelated to the executive's argument.

e) The newspaper was widely read throughout continental Europe and Great Britain as well as North America.

- This answer choice is irrelevant to the argument, as the geographic distribution of the newspaper's readership does not affect the relationship between the valuable training and the justification for lower salaries.

Thus, the correct answer is B, as it most seriously undermines the justification offered by the executive.