The second reason is that reform did not come until political pressure produced bans of certain UFC events. Ignoring public outcries of brutality was a huge faux pas. Damaging image problems and decreasing profits eventually motivated the UFC to work with state athletic commissions to give athletes a safer and fairer competition. We must keep pressure on the promoters. Even competitors with Herculean strength deserve a fair fight.

Which statement BEST counters a viewpoint in section three?
A) Early promoters of UFC events never worked with state athletic commissions.
B) Early promoters of UFC events resisted working with state athletic commissions.
C) Early promoters of UFC events were eager to work with state athletic commissions, without public pressure being a necessary inducement.
D) Promoters of UFC events were eventually pressured to work with state athletic commissions.

The correct answer is choice C. Promoters of UFC events were eager to work with state athletic commissions, without public pressure being a necessary inducement.

Answer Link

chaplinway chaplinway · Answer 2 · 2019-10-04T16:26:21+02:00

Answer:

The statement that BEST counters a viewpoint in section three is Promoters of UFC events were eventually pressured to work with state athletic commissions.

Explanation:

The excerpt talks about how the UFC events were modified in order to present more secure fights, the line "reform did not come until political pressure produced bans" supports the idea that UFC events were "eventually" pressured, and this is reassured with the last line by saying that it is important to keep on pressuring them.