Should only the articles of deserving authors be allowed to be published in newspapers and magazines? Arguments: 1. Yes, because this will save a lot of paper which is already in short supply. 2. No, because it is very difficult to draw a clear line between deserving and undeserving authors.

Introduction / Context:
This question deals with editorial policy in publishing. The proposal is that only deserving authors should be allowed to publish articles. Two arguments are given, one focusing on saving paper and the other on the difficulty of judging who is deserving. You need to identify the strong argument.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement: Only articles of deserving authors should be published.
• Argument 1: Yes, this will save paper because paper is in short supply.
• Argument 2: No, it is not easy to decide who is deserving and who is not.
• We assume that editorial decisions should focus on quality, fairness and practicality.

Concept / Approach:
A strong argument must be central to the issue. The core of this question is about criteria for publication, not paper shortage. Argument 1 shifts the focus from quality to a resource issue, which is secondary. Argument 2 directly addresses the difficulty of objectively applying a rule based on the word "deserving."

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Evaluate argument 1. It says the rule will save paper. However, saving paper can also be achieved through better editing, digital formats or page limits. It is not a convincing justification for restricting publication only to so called deserving authors. Step 2: Hence, argument 1 is weak and not central to the stated policy. Step 3: Evaluate argument 2. It points out that there is no clear and objective way to separate deserving from undeserving authors. Step 4: Since the lack of clear criteria can lead to bias and unfair exclusion, this is a strong and realistic practical objection to the proposal.

Verification / Alternative check:
Consider how an editor would behave. They would worry about fairness and possible controversies in rejecting work, not mainly about paper usage. This supports the strength of argument 2.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Options that treat argument 1 as strong ignore that it does not address the core problem. The option that both arguments are strong is wrong because they are not equally relevant. The option that neither is strong is also wrong because argument 2 clearly raises a serious challenge. The option that selection cannot be judged from these arguments is incorrect since we can evaluate them logically.

Common Pitfalls:
Students sometimes think that any economic argument like saving paper is strong. But in logical reasoning, the argument must be central to the decision and not a side issue.

Final Answer:
Therefore, only argument 2 is strong, and the correct option is the one that selects argument 2 alone as strong.