PrepTest 125

Incorrect. There's no discussion of effort in the stimulus. Ethics are also discussed tangentially through lying, but there's a universal belief that doing so is wrong and there's no clear-cut case of journalists lying, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. While the stimulus does highlight a debate over whether one particular action counts as lying, and whether quotes should be "tightened," there's no indication that there's no way to resolve these debates. The stimulus doesn't reach a conclusion, but that doesn't mean one doesn't exist.

Incorrect. While this answer may be a belief of those reporters who think undercover reporting counts as lying, that's only one view of the stimulus, and not one that's presented as being true/correct. Additionally, this answer is a generalization from one instance of their viewpoint, so it's not even definitely true for that group.

Incorrect. There's no discussion of a situation where lying is permissible, just one situation where there's disagreement over what constitutes lying.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
Universal rule of journalism - Lying is wrong
Some reporters - Quotes should be verbatim
Other reporters - Quotes can be "tightened" because the speaker would have done so in writing
Many reporters - Not saying you're a reporter is OK to weed out wrongdoing
Many other reporters - Not saying you're a reporter is lying

Answer Anticipation:
This stimulus is interesting in that it presents a universal rule and then highlights the nuance that is required to really understand it.

All of the viewpoints of specific groups of reporters represent what "many" and "many others" think. While there are two sets of non-overlapping beliefs, there's no indication that any of these views are shared by a majority of reporters—just some/many of them.

Additionally, while some of the views can't overlap, others can, and there's no indication if they do or do not. Specifically, the groups discussed in the section on quotations may or may not overlap with the groups discussed in the "undercover reporting" section.

Since those discussions are individually too weak to form inferences either by themselves or through combination, the correct answer will therefore come from either the rule that journalists "universally" agree with, or combining that statement with one of the weaker ones. Since the first scenario—quotations—don't directly address lying, any inference from a combination of statements would likely be drawn between that first statement and the debate over whether undercover reporting counts as lying. Let's head into the answers with that in mind.

Answer Explanation:
Some reporters believe that undercover reporting is fine, whereas others consider it lying. Since journalists "universally" agree that lying is "absolutely" taboo, that first group must believe that lying is wrong, and thus that undercover reporting isn't lying. That puts them at odds with the second group, thus justifying this answer.

Key Takeaway:
Must Be True questions tend to draw inferences from stronger statements. If you run into a stimulus that has one statement that is significantly stronger than all other statements, it's almost certain to play a role in allowing you to infer the correct answer.