Striking newspaper carrier: The fact that this subscriber canceled her newspaper subscription is a triumph for the striking workers. It shows that the subscriber supports the striking worker' s claim that they are not getting paid enough. Newspaper company X' s president: That is ridiculous! The canceled subscription does not mean that the subscriber supports the striking workers. The subscription was canceled because the subscriber has said she does not read the newspaper every day and the subscriber prefers another newspaper. Ttherefore, the canceled subscription had nothing to do with supporting your strike. The reasoning in newspaper company X's president's argument is flawed because the argument ['gives a detailed analogy to show how his opponent has mischaracterized the situation', "overlooks the possibility that the subscriber's proffered reasons for canceling her subscription may themselves show support for the striking workers", 'fails to consider that any subscriber may wish to cancel his subscription in support of the striking workers', 'concedes a point made by an opponent that weakens the overall conclusion made by the company president']