Question

aligned from four little words
by osnat dancyg
this passage appeared as the author’s introduction to silenced: international journalists expose media
censorship.
what does it feel like to be prevented from writing or speaking the truth? to be censored? americans
tend to be more fortunate than most. four little words in the first amendment to the united states
constitution, “or of the press,” and a number of crucial supreme court decisions have prevented the
government from overtly censoring the media. of course, this is not to say that media censorship does
not exist in america. it does—it exists in every society—but it is far subtler than the government simply
trying to prevent the publication of an embarrassing story.

what if those four little words had never been written? indeed, let’s go one step further—what if
journalism as a profession had never existed? if there were no newspapers, radio, television, or even
the internet? such an exercise serves to show just how much we rely on journalists and their essential
role: the dissemination of information.

for a start, it is likely that our views of events would be much more limited than in the real world. our
ability to make decisions concerning the events around us would rest on what we saw with our own
eyes or on what others told us. society in such a world would be at the mercy of conspiracy theorists
as facts became mangled and confused with each telling. if this is difficult to appreciate, try to imagine
how a description of the assassination of president john f. kennedy would have sounded after its
fiftieth telling.

moreover, it’s likely that our busy lives, predominantly spent earning a living, would make us studier
and poorer looking. we would be woefully uninformed in the events of the outside world. we would
not have the time to investigate the events around us. it is highly unlikely we would find the time to
go to a local council meeting or travel to a presidential candidate’s debate. would we have time to
investigate the conditions in a children’s home or a hospital? how many of us would be prepared to
give up our leisure time to see if a landfill site was being used improperly? probably very few of us.

read the excerpt from “four little words.”
what if those four little words had never been written? indeed, let’s go one step further—what if journalism as a
profession had never existed? if there were no newspapers, radio, television, or even the internet? such an
exercise serves to show just how much we rely on journalists and their essential role: the dissemination of
information.
which statement best describes the effect of introducing a hypothetical situation early in the text?

it warns readers that “the dissemination of information” is being limited in our current political
climate.

it encourages readers to be skeptical of the level at which people “rely on journalists” for
information.

it reminds readers of the “essential role” of the press, supporting the author’s argument about
journalists’ unique responsibility.

it offers a historical perspective on “journalism as a profession,” helping readers better understand
the author’s opinion.

Explanation:

1. Analyze Option 1: The excerpt doesn't discuss limiting "dissemination of information" in the current political climate. It's about the role of journalism, not current limitations. Eliminate.
2. Analyze Option 2: The text aims to show reliance on journalists, not encourage skepticism. The hypothetical is to highlight importance, not doubt it. Eliminate.
3. Analyze Option 3: The hypothetical ("what if journalism...never existed?") shows how much we rely on journalists, supporting the argument about their essential role (dissemination of information). This matches the text's purpose.
4. Analyze Option 4: The hypothetical isn't a historical perspective. It's a thought experiment about a world without journalism, not historical context. Eliminate.

Answer:

C. It reminds readers of the "essential role" of the press, supporting the author’s argument about journalists’ unique responsibility.