[求助]LSAT-7-4-12，谢谢

12.   To suit the needs of corporate clients, advertising agencies have successfully modified a strategy originally developed for political campaigns. This strategy aims to provide clients with free publicity and air time by designing an advertising campaign that is controversial, thus drawing prime-time media coverage and evoking public comment by officials.

The Statements above, if true, most seriously undermine which one of the following assertions?

(A) The usefulness of an advertising campaign is based solely on the degree to which the campaign’s advertisements persuade their audiences.

(B) Only a small percentage of eligible voters admit to being influenced by advertising campaigns in deciding how to vote.

(C) Campaign managers have transformed political campaigns by making increasing use of strategies borrowed from corporate advertising campaigns.

(D) Corporations are typically more concerned with maintaining public recognition of the corporate name than with enhancing goodwill toward the corporation.（A）

(E) Advertising agencies that specialize in campaigns for corporate clients are not usually chosen for political campaigns.

题目问文章的内容可以削弱哪一个选项的assertion，也就是和平时的削弱题的问法是相反的方向。文章的内容我大概看懂了，正确选项是（A），不明白文章中的内容如何削弱了（A）选项？

其实无论是削弱文中内容还是答案选项， 基本上都是围绕着前提展开的。 例如这题， 文中说， if the advertising campaign can raise controversy and elicit public comments by officials ( premise), it will be successful. 而选项中， 只有A与之对立， 举出了一个（并认为是唯一的）评判标准——是不是能说服观众， 而如果这个前提条件成立的话，文中结论就不能成立了。 所以， A.  其他选项根本无从判断。

哦，原来没有想到，把文章前后的内容融合在一起来看。本来觉得（A）中提到了usefulness of an advertising campaign 在原文中好像没有说到，但实际上，文章开头就说到了advertising agencies have successfully modified a strategy ，失误啊！

嗯，明白了，谢谢版主的解答：）