Bardis: Extensive research shows that television advertisements affect the buying habits of consumers. Some people conclude from this that violent television imagery sometimes causes violent behavior. But the effectiveness of television advertisements could be a result of those televised images being specifically designed to alter buying habits, whereas television violence is not designed to cause violent behavior. Hence we can safely conclude that violent television imagery does not cause violence. The reasoning in Bardis's argument is flawed because that argument ['undermines its own position by questioning the persuasive power of television advertising', 'fails to distinguish a type of behavior from a type of stimulus that may or may not affect behavior', 'relies on an illegitimate inference from the fact that advertisements can change behavior to the claim that advertisements can cause violent behavior', 'concludes that a claim is false on the basis of one purported fault in an argument in favor of that claim']