Logical Reasoning

PT108 · S3 · Q20 Sarah: Reporters, by allotting time

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Sarah: Reporters, by allotting time to some events rather than others, are exercising their judgment as to what is newsworthy and what is not.

Sarah's 1st Claim

By deciding which events will get coverage / airtime, reporters are exercising their judgment as to what is newsworthy and what is not. Does Ramon argue that 'deciding which stories to cover is not reporters' exercising their judgment'?

No, in fact Ramon seems to agree that reporters exercise their judgment by saying "once [reporters] deem a story to be newsworthy".

Sarah's 2nd Claim

Reporters always interpret the news. Does Ramon argue that 'no, sometimes reporters do not interpret the news'?

Yes, kind of. He's saying that they should never interpret the news, which isn't a statement about what reporters do; it's a statement about what they should do.

But it seems to imply that they have a choice whether or not to interpret the news.

Evaluate

This is a weird set of statements to digest. Ramon doesn't quite disagree with either of Sarah's claims, but he definitely doesn't vibe with "they always interpret the news".

He's saying, "they should never interpret the news".

How are they ending up at such polar extremes (always vs. never)?

Well, she's saying that they're interpreting the news by deciding which stories 'to platform', which ones get airtime. Interpretation is defined as 'picking which stories get to be told'.

But Ramon is apparently thinking of interpretation of 'deciding how to tell a story' (not deciding to tell a story). We know this because he's saying,

He's thinking of interpretation as "the subjective spin you put on a story", while she's thinking of it as .

Goal

It seems like we want an answer that sounds something like, "What does it mean to interpret the news?"

20.

Sarah and Ramon's remarks provide the most support for holding that they disagree about the truth of which one of the following statements?

Reporters actually do interpret the
Unsupported Person 2
This answer is very tempting, but Ramon doesn't comment at all on what reporters actually do, only what they should / are obliged to do. Since we aren't told his stance on what they actually do, we can't say he disagrees with Sarah. I also think this answer misrepresents the sense of "always interpreting" that Sarah is using. She would really say "reporters actually interpret the news every time they decide on a story to report". The act of relaying the story isn't even in Sarah's definition of "interpretation". So we might struggle to even say that Sarah agrees with this (and she would be the one more likely to agree).
18% picked this
Reporters should exercise their own
No Support for Person 1
This is the flipside of choice (A). Ramon talked about what reporters should do, but Sarah only talks about what reporters do do. We have no idea what Sarah thinks reporters should do.
12% picked this
Reporters' primary responsibility is to
Unsupported Both Too Strong: primary
We couldn't infer from either person's statements what they think is the primary responsibility of reporters. Ramon definitely thinks that deeming a story to be newsworthy and relaying that story in a detached, objective manner are each responsibilities of reporters. Which does he think is a bigger responsibility? Who knows.
3% picked this
Reporters should not allot time
No Support for Person 1
As soon as we see "should" we can ditch the answer, since Person 1 doesn't make any claims that deal with what should be, just claims that deal with what is the case.
5% picked this
Correct
Reporting on certain events rather
Why this is right
Sarah would say YES, because this is the connective tissue between her two statements. The "in other words" means that we could restate the first sentence (deciding what qualifies as news) as "interpreting the news". Ramon would say NO, because he has said that "reporters should never interpret the news". If he thought that "Interpreting news = deciding which stories to report on", then he would be saying "Reporters should never decide which stories to report on". But his 2nd claim begins, "Once reporters decide which stories to report on (i.e. deem which stories are newsworthy". So if he subscribed to this definition of interpreting than he would be contradicting himself: "Reporters should never do X. Once they do X, they should do Y." Instead, Ramon clearly interprets interpreting as failing to relay the facts untainted ... i.e. adding some subjective color to the way they relay a story.
Skill tested: Agree/Disagree · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
62% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free