Statement: “If we truly wish to reduce the menace of smoking, our deeds should reflect it — including our movies, which currently depict smoking far more than actual consumption among the public.” — view of Mr X.\nAssumptions:\nI. There is a strong link between films and viewers’ behavior.\nII. Showing smoking in movies increases smoking among the public.\nIII. The menace of smoking can be reduced through proper planning and appropriate efforts.

Introduction / Context:
Mr X argues that to reduce smoking, cultural outputs like films must align with that goal, criticizing movies for showing more smoking than occurs in reality. The policy suggestion presumes that depictions influence behavior and that the problem is tractable through deliberate action.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Claim: movies over-depict smoking relative to real prevalence.
• Prescription: align creative output with reduction goals.

Concept / Approach:
For the prescription to matter, two assumptions are required: (II) on-screen smoking increases population smoking (a causal influence), and (III) the smoking problem can be mitigated by purposeful efforts (including media choices). A broad, abstract “strong link” between films and behavior (I) is not strictly necessary; the required link is specifically about smoking imagery and smoking behavior, captured by II.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) The argument connects content (depictions) to outcomes (public smoking). That is II’s claim.2) It also assumes interventions and planning can reduce smoking — III.3) A generic “films influence behavior” (I) is broader than required; the author’s case succeeds with the specific causal channel and tractability without asserting a general influence on all behaviors.

Verification / Alternative check:
Even if films influenced some behaviors but not others, as long as smoking depictions specifically affect smoking uptake (II) and the problem is policy-responsive (III), the recommendation stands.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Options lacking II sever the causal hinge; options lacking III negate the purpose of changing depictions.

Common Pitfalls:
Conflating a general media-effects thesis with the narrower, targeted effect relevant here.

Final Answer:
Only II and III.