Unless specifically stated in the contract, athletes promoting sporting gear of a company are not obligated to refrain from using sporting gear made by a rival company. Therefore, a leading long distance runner who promotes the sneakers of Company X has decided to wear a brand of sneakers made by Company Y, which better suit his professional needs.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the long-distance runner's decision?
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice weakens the conclusion, but you are required to strengthen it. If wearing one brand while promoting another lowers one's chances of getting a good advertising contract, the athlete's decision is not a good one at all.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice neither strengthens nor weakens the athlete's decision. The expectations of the advertising companies are irrelevant to the conclusion if they are not followed by actions. How failing to meet these expectations may affect the athlete is the issue at hand.
Correct!
[[snippet]]This answer choice strengthens the athlete's decision. It does so by providing an example of a fellow athlete who benefited from the decision to use one brand while promoting another.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice neither strengthens nor weakens the conclusion. The popularity of the long distance runner, while probably the reason for getting the promotional contract in the first place, is irrelevant to the athlete's conclusion, since it has nothing to do with the possible effects of using one brand of merchandise while advertising another.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice deals with a topic that is out of the scope of the argument and cannot, therefore, strengthen the conclusion. Movie actors are not necessarily treated the same way as athletes. Therefore, the expectations from them by the companies whose products they advertise are irrelevant.