GWD-TN-5 Q41 无法理解答案。。。

happycjc108

Magazine Publisher:  Our magazine does not have a liberal bias.  It is true that when a book review we had commissioned last year turned out to express distinctly conservative views, we did not publish it until we had also obtained a second review that took a strongly liberal position.  Clearly, however, our actions demonstrate not a bias in favor of liberal views but rather a commitment to a balanced presentation of diverse opinions.

Determining which of the following would be most useful in evaluating the cogency of the magazine publisher’s response?
   
A.    Whether any other magazines in which the book was reviewed carried more than one review of the book
B.    Whether the magazine publishes unsolicited book reviews as well as those that it has commissioned
C.    Whether in the event that a first review commissioned by the magazine takes a clearly liberal position the magazine would make any efforts to obtain further reviews
D.    Whether the book that was the subject of the two reviews was itself written from a clearly conservative or a clearly liberal point of view
E.    Whether most of the readers of the magazine regularly read the book reviews that the magazine publishes

答案是C,不明白。。。

flyingbunny

出版社得到 第一种意见A，没有发表，直到意见B出来了 才发表。

那么如果是意见B先出来，出版社是不是也会等A呢？

就像一个人 M 喜欢另一个人 F，如果F 也喜欢 M, 才能说他们彼此喜欢啊。

liulianf

哇~  顶楼上，如此纠结的解释~  本题看吐了

helenlife

这道不难理解啦：

杂志社说：我们的杂志不带有自由主义偏见。真实的情况是，如果我们的去年进行的书评明显带有保守的意见（一次拨书评），我们不会发表，只到第二拨书评明显带有自由派立场。当然，很明显，我们的目的不是偏向于自由派观点而是致力于平衡不同的观点。

以下观点哪个最能用于评估杂志社回答的说服力？

C:如果第一批书评已经明显带有自由派立场，那杂志社还会进行下一波的书评吗？

C直接质疑杂志社，因为他们没有说明C情况下，他们会怎么做。