Balance is particularly important when reporting the background of civil wars and conflicts. Facts must not be delibe...

Ravi March 12, 2019

@emmarie,

Great question.

In order to answer these questions with greater accuracy, I recommend
focusing more on understanding each component of the stimulus and how
it relates to the rest of what's being said in the passage. If this is
done well, then the conclusion of the argument will always stand out,
and identifying it in the answer choices will be much easier.

When we read the stimulus and break the argument down, we find that
the conclusion is that reporting must be balanced but that such
balanced reporting does not justify concealing or glossing over basic
injustices in an effort to be even-handed.

The main premise for this conclusion is that if all of the media were
to adopt such a perverse (i.e., concealing injustices in an effort to
be even-handed) interpretation of balanced reporting, the public would
be given a picture of the world where each party in every conflict had
an equal measure of justice on its side. This sentence is tricky
because it contains within it a premise and a conclusion. However, the
conclusion of this sentence (the public would be given a picture of a
world where each party in every conflict had an equal measure of
justice on its side) is a subsidiary conclusion that supports the
overall conclusion of the argument that reporting must be balanced but
that such balanced reporting does not justify concealing or glossing
over basic injustices in an effort to be even-handed.

(B) says, "Balanced reporting requires impartially revealing
injustices where they occur no less than fairly presenting the views
of each party in a conflict."

This is a great paraphrase of what we identified as the main point,
which is "This concept of balance, however, does not justify
concealing or glossing over basic injustices in an effort to be even
handed."

Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any more questions!