Question

As it happens, Feldman’s accidental study provides a window onto a form of cheating that has long stymied academics: white-collar crime. (Yes, shorting the bagel man is white-collar crime, writ however small.) It might seem ludicrous to address as large and intractable a problem as white-collar crime through the life of a bagel man. But often a small and simple question can help chisel away at the biggest problems. Despite all the attention paid to rogue companies like Enron, academics know very little about the practicalities of white-collar crime. The reason? There are no good data. A key fact of white-collar crime is that we hear about only the very slim fraction of people who are caught cheating. Most embezzlers lead quiet and theoretically happy lives; employees who steal company property are rarely detected. What purpose does the “bagel man” serve in this argument?

Answer 1

C. "to show the seriousness of cheating"
Just took the test

Answer 2

The correct answer is:

It´s an example to show the seriousness of cheating.

Paul Feldman, the Bagel Man mentioned in Freakonomics by Levitt and Dubner, is a man who started his own business selling bagels. He started leaving bagels in an office building, next to a box with a hole in the top and a sign requesting clients who took a bagel to leave money in return.

His statistics about how often people stole bagels is used as an example of white collar crime.