Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for products to be purchased from the home, so the percept...

Cameron on April 15, 2019


How does B strengthen this argument?

3 Replies

Ravi on April 16, 2019


Happy to help.

(B) says, "Most of the products purchased in response to direct-mail
advertisements would be purchased even without the direct-mail

If people are buying items that they would be purchasing even without
the direct-mail advertisements, then the fact that direct-mail
advertisements would save these people trips to the store (causing
them to use less gasoline) is a relevant detail. Thus, (B) strengthens
the argument.

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

Hannah on September 25, 2019

@Ravi how can we assume that these items, which people were planning on purchasing anyway, would have required a trip to the store? I don't see how this answer suggest a change in consumption patterns in a way that necessarily is more environmentally-friendly.

on September 26 at 10:23PM

Hello @Hannah-Anderson,

According to the passage, we are talking specifically about products "whose purchase would otherwise require the use of a car." We don't have to assume that these products require a trip to the store, because that information is already given to us.