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

candace on April 15, 2019


How does B strengthen this argument?

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

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-Anderson 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.

SamA on September 26, 2019

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.