Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions: Statement: “Believe me, I have read it in newspaper X.” Assumptions: I. Newspaper X provides reliable information. II. I am reporting the content exactly as it appeared in newspaper X.

Introduction / Context:
This is a credibility-based argument: the speaker asks to be believed because the claim appeared in a specific newspaper. To decide which assumptions are implicit, we analyze what must be true for the appeal to authority (the newspaper) to persuade the listener.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The speaker cites newspaper X as the source.
• Assumption I: Newspaper X is trustworthy and accurate.
• Assumption II: The speaker is conveying the report faithfully (no misquotation, distortion, or omission).

Concept / Approach:
For a source-based appeal to work, two links must hold: the source must be reliable, and the messenger must transmit the information accurately. If either link breaks, the exhortation “Believe me” loses force.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Negate I: If newspaper X is notorious for inaccuracies, “Believe me, it was in X” fails as a reason. Negate II: If the speaker paraphrases incorrectly, the actual content of X does not support the stated claim. In both negations, the argument collapses.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only I or Only II: Each ignores the other essential link in the credibility chain.
• Either / Neither: An appeal to authority needs both a credible authority and accurate transmission.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming the source’s name alone guarantees correctness, or forgetting that misquoting can invalidate otherwise reliable sources.

Final Answer:
Both I and II are implicit