Statement: "Advertisements on social media have more reach than print media."
Conclusions:
I. Social media is more effective than print media for advertising.
II. Print media is obsolete.
Analyzing the Statement on Advertising Reach
The core of the problem lies in understanding the relationship between the given statement and the proposed conclusions.
Statement: "Advertisements on social media have more reach than print media."
This statement makes a specific comparison based solely on the metric of reach. It claims social media platforms connect with a larger audience compared to traditional print media.
Evaluating Conclusion I
Conclusion I: "Social media is more effective than print media for advertising."
- The statement highlights that social media has a greater reach.
- Reach refers to the total number of unique people exposed to an advertisement.
- While effectiveness can depend on various factors (like engagement, conversion rates, cost, audience targeting precision, etc.), greater reach is often a primary driver of effectiveness. A larger audience potentially means more customers or greater brand awareness.
- Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that having more reach suggests social media could be more effective for advertising than print media, at least in terms of audience size. This conclusion logically follows from the premise of greater reach.
Evaluating Conclusion II
Conclusion II: "Print media is obsolete."
- The statement says social media has more reach, not that print media has *no* reach or is completely unusable.
- "Obsolete" means outdated and no longer useful.
- The statement does not provide enough information to conclude that print media is obsolete. Print media might still be valuable for reaching specific demographics or achieving certain advertising goals, even if its overall reach is less than social media's.
- Concluding that print media is obsolete based solely on the fact that social media has a larger reach is an exaggeration and an unsupported leap in logic.
Final Determination
Based on the analysis:
- Conclusion I is a plausible inference derived from the statement about comparative reach.
- Conclusion II is an unsupported overstatement and does not logically follow from the statement.
Therefore, only Conclusion I follows from the given statement.
Similar Questions
The statements given below are followed by two conclusions labelled I and II. Without resolving anything yourself, choose the conclusion which logically follows from the given statement.
Statements:
Most of the advocates are hard working.
Manoj is advocate.
Conclusion I: Manoj is politician.
Conclusion II: Some advocates do not work hard.The statement below is followed by two decisions labeled I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true and then decide which of the two suggested decisions logically follows for pursuing.
Statement:
The councilor of the area proposed to install CCTV camera in the locality to avoid crimes and to catch criminals.
Decisions:
I: Residents should welcome this proposal.
II: This is useless proposal: resident should oppose it.The statement below is followed by two conclusion labelled I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true, and then decide which of the conclusions logically follows for pursuing.
Statement: Drinking milk is beneficial for health.
Conclusion I: All healthy people drink milk.
Conclusion II: Milk is harmful for child.The statement below is followed by two conclusions labelled I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true, and then decide which of the conclusions logically follows for pursuing.
Statements:
All organised person find time for entertainment. Mahesh in spite his busy schedule, find time for entertainment.
Conclusion:
I. Mahesh is organized person.
II. Mahesh is an actor.- Statement: Innovation requires risk-taking, but excessive risks without planning can lead to failure.
Conclusion I: Risk-taking alone does not guarantee innovation.
Conclusion II: Planning is always necessary for successful innovation.
Which conclusion follows? - Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows.
Statements: All flowers are trees. Some trees are plants.
Conclusions:
I. Some flowers are plants.
II. All flowers are plants. - Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows.
Statement: "People who regularly exercise are less likely to fall ill."
Conclusions:
I. Regular exercise improves immunity.
II. Illness is directly linked to lack of physical activity. - Statement: Emotional intelligence enhances leadership, but without technical expertise, leaders may fail to meet organizational objectives. Conclusion I: Emotional intelligence alone is not enough for leadership success.
Conclusion II: Technical expertise ensures effective leadership.
Which conclusion follows? - Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows.
Statement: The school has made computer training compulsory for all students.
Conclusions:
I. Computer knowledge is essential in the modern world.
II. All students will become computer experts.
Important Questions from Statements and Conclusions
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements.
Statements:
I. All A are B.
II. Some B are C.
Conclusions:
I. Some A are C.
II. Some A are not C.
III. Some A are B.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully and decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements.
Statement:
A asked C, "What time is it now?" Is it half past two? ''
Conclusions:
1. A wants to go to lunch.
2. A wants to confirm what the time is because his watch is off.
In the question one statement is given, followed by two conclusions, I and II. You have to consider the statements to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given conclusions, if any, follows from the given statements.
Statement : 55% of Manisha's office colleagues went to watch the movie.
Conclusion I : Manisha went to watch the movie.
Conclusion II : Manisha did not go to watch the movie.
In the question two statements are given, followed by two conclusions, I and II. You have to consider the statements to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given conclusions, if any, follows from the given statements.
Statement 1 : All schools are books.
Statement 2 : No books are papers.
Conclusion I : No schools are books.
Conclusion II : Some books are schools.
In the question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be different from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements.
Statements:
I. Some P are Q.
II. All P are N.
Conclusion:
I. All Q are N.
II. Some P are not Q.
