Thanks for the question! Let’s recap this stimulus and break it down. So the first sentence tells us that in order to suit the needs of corporate clients, advertising agencies basically took a strategy for political campaigns. So political campaigns used to do something to get people elected and had this strategy. And now advertising agencies are using this for private, business clients.
The second sentence tells us what this strategy is. It gets the clients free publicity and air time. And how does it do this? Well, it makes a controversial campaign. And the controversy gets people to cover it, and so the corporate client gets prime time media coverage, and officials comment on it. So it’s being controversial on purpose to get attention.
Now, this isn’t really an argument, it’s a fact set. There’s no conclusion. But we need to find something that they undermine. Now take a look at (A), which tells us that the usefulness of an advertising campaign is based solely on the degree to which the campaign can persuade its audiences. If what the stimulus says is true, is the usefulness of the campaign ONLY based on persuasion? No, advertising campaigns can be useful in other ways too, like by getting controversy and drawing attention. That’s not necessarily persuasion, that’s just getting people to listen to you by being controversial. And that goes against the idea that only persuasion is important, since there’s these other factors, and so (A) is undermined by the sentences and incorrect.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
