This one is saying that in countries where there is not a free flow of information to the majority of the population, then the majority of the population does not have information about the factors that determine their welfare. It then jumps to say that these countries are more likely to experience more frequent economic crises because of it.
See how there's a gap between the premise and the conclusion? We need something to fill in the gap between the flow of information and the propensity for economic crises. We can go into the answers looking for something that fills that gap.
A says people without political power will suffer the crises more, which is irrelevant when we're discussing whether the whole country is experiencing a crisis.
B says crises become more frequent as the amount of information the population has about important factors diminishes. This is what we were looking for! Save it and check out the others to be sure.
C could be tempting because it says that in countries where the government controls access to information, crises are more common. However, this doesn't quite make the connection we were looking for from free flowing information on public welfare to economic crises.
D talks about the quality of the decisions versus the population involved, which is very democratic, but is irrelevant when we're talking about crises, not quality of decisions.
E says that a small elite who controls the information will likely manipulate it for its own benefit. That would be good support for the argument that these countries are more likely to experience crisis, but doesn't connect why it is these countries are the most likely to have crises.
