Criticism that the press panders to public sentiment neglects to consider that the press is a profit-making institution. Like other private enterprises, it has to make money to survive. If press were not profit-making, who would support it? The only alternative is subsidy and, with it, outside control. It is easy to get subsidies for propaganda, but no one will subsidize honest journalism.
It can be properly inferred from the passage that if the press is
(A) not subsidized, it is in no danger of outside control
(B) not subsidized, it will not produce propaganda
(C) not to be subsidized, it cannot be a profit-making institution
(D) to produce honest journalism, it must be profit-making institution（D）
(E) to make a profit, it must produce honest journalism
A good reasoned question:
If press were not profit-making, who would support it? The only alternative is subsidy<=>
press were not profit-making-->be subsidy<=>not be subsidy-->press were profit-making.
no one will subsidize honest journalism<=>if honest journalism, then no one will subsidize<=>
honest journalism-->no one will subsidize.=>honest journalism-->no one will subsidize-->press were profit-making=>D
If press were not profit-making, who would support it? The only alternative is subsidy
1。由此话知：not profit-making----〉subsidy
no one will subsidize honest journalism
2。由此话知： honest journalism---〉no one will subsidize
由1，2 可知D
leeon 发表于 2004-10-18 15:13
Criticism that the press panders to public sentiment neglects to consider that the press is a profit ...
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |