When a threat to life is common, as are automobile and industrial accidents, only unusual instances tend to be prominently reported by the news media. Instances of rare threats, such as product tampering, however, are seen as news by reporters and are universally reported in featured stories. People in general tend to estimate the risk of various threats by how frequently those threats come to their attention. If the statements above are true, which one of the following is most strongly supported on the basis of them? ['The resources that are spent on avoiding product tampering are greater than the resources that are spent on avoiding threats that stem from the weather.', 'Those who get their information primarily from the news media tend to overestimate the risk of uncommon threats relative to the risk of common threats.', 'Reporters tend not to seek out information about long-range future threats but to concentrate their attention on the immediate past and future.', 'People tend to magnify the risk of a threat if the threat seems particularly dreadful or if those who would be affected have no control over it.']