Teacher: Journalists who conceal the identity of the sources they quote stake their professional reputations on what may be called the logic of anecdotes. This is so because the statements reported by such journalists are dissociated from the precise circumstances in which they were made and thus will be accepted for publication only if the statements are high in plausibility or originality or interest to a given audience -- precisely the properties of a good anecdote. Student: But what you are saying, then, is that the journalist need not bother with sources in the first place. Surely, any reasonably resourceful journalist can invent plausible, original, or interesting stories faster than they can be obtained from unidentified sources. The student's response contains which one of the following reasoning flaws? ['confusing a marginal journalistic practice with the primary work done by journalists', 'ignoring the possibility that the teacher regards as a prerequisite for the publication of an unattributed statement that the statement have actually been made', "judging the merits of the teacher's position solely by the most extreme case to which the position applies", 'confusing the characteristics of reported statements with the characteristics of the situations in which the statements were made']