Generally, opponents refer those who hold different view from the arguer's. Thus, in this stimulus, the only rival side against the arguer is those who decried tailoring news resport as a form of misrepresentation. If so, E appears to be absurd in that the opponent has never admiited anything in this stimulus. On the other hand, if the second half refers to the admission by the arguer that, in order to present clearly, it is neceesary to fabricate, this reasoning technique hardly can be called as questionable. In terms the practice itself, if it does effectively prevent a misrepresentation, it will certainly be always right (never inappropriate). However, the key in this question is that the cited problem (people's ideas not be expressed clearly in absence of fabrication) is not the only consequence following from an alternative practice-reporting the exact words, other possible results including 1)people's exact words were quoted and their ideas were fully expressed, 2) people's words were tailored in light of media's view and their ideas were not fully expressed.... therefore, C identifies this mistake exactly. If the word" rarely" is changed into " never" in the second sentense, then the choice will be D. |