49.       
　　This editorial begins with the impressive statistic¹ that five-million trees could be saved every year if the morning edition of the nation's largest newspaper were collected and rendered into pulp² that the newspaper could reuse. But then the author goes on to conclude that this kind of recycling is unnecessary because the newspaper maintains its own forests to ensure an uninterrupted supply of paper. This argument is seriously flawed by two unwarranted assumptions.

      The first assumption is that the only reason to recycle the newspaper is to ensure a continuous supply of paper. The author reasons that since this need is currently met by the forests that the newspaper maintains, recycling is unnecessary. This reasoning is extremely shortsighted. Not only does the author fail to see the ecological³ advantages of preserving the trees, he also fails to see the obvious economic advantages of doing this. Moreover, using recycled paper is the best way to ensure a continuous paper supply because, unlike the forest, paper is a reusable resource.

      The second assumption is that only the newspaper would have an interest in the pulp processed from its recycled morning edition. This is probably not the case, however, given the enormous market for recycled paper—for books, packaging, other newspapers, and so on. Moreover, there is no direct connection between the newspaper that is recycled and those companies that find uses for the products of recycling. Accordingly, contrary to the author's assumption, there may be a great interest, indeed a need, for pulp from recycling the newspaper in question.

      In conclusion, the author's claim that recycling the newspaper is unnecessary is ill-founded. To strengthen the argument the author would have to show that there are no other compelling reasons to recycle the newspaper besides the one cited in the editorial.

50.      
　　 The new manager of the rock group Zapped believes that name recognition is the key to attaining⁴ financial success for the group. To increase name recognition the manager recommends that Zapped diversify⁵ its commercial enterprises. The grounds for this recommendation is an analogy with Zonked, a much better-known rock group that plays the same kind of music as Zapped. According to the manager, the main reason Zonked is better known than Zapped is that Zonked participates in several promotional enterprises in addition to concerts and albums. The manager's recommendation is questionable⁶ for two reasons.

      In the first place, the author assumes that the only relevant difference between Zapped and Zonked is that Zonked has greater name recognition than Zapped. If this were the case, the manager's recommendation would be apt. However, the fact that the two rock groups play the same kind of music leaves open the question of whether their performance of this music is comparable. If Zonked's performance is sufficiently⁷ better than Zapped's, this could go a long way toward explaining why Zonked is much better known.

      In the second place, the author assumes that name recognition is all that is required for financial success. While name recognition is an important element in determining the success or failure of any enterprise, it is hardly the only element required. Other factors are equally important. In the case of rock bands, factors such as musical talent, showmanship, and repertoire⁸ play a significant role in determining the financial success of the group. If Zonked is superior to Zapped in these areas, this difference could account for Zonked's financial success.

      In conclusion, the manager's argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to show that Zapped and Zonked are alike in all relevant ways except name recognition.