小弟发现张剑老师的黄皮书一个看不懂(不敢说是错误)的地方...求解

小弟发现张剑老师的黄皮书一个看不懂(不敢说是错误)的地方...求解
题目是
学术期刊出版的变化(2008年TEXT2)

It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in the laboratory would submit the results of their research to a journal. A journal editor would then remove the authors’ names and affiliations from the paper and send it to their peers for review. Depending on the comments received, the editor would accept the paper for publication or decline it. Copyright rested with the journal publisher, and researchers seeking knowledge of the results would have to subscribe to the journal.
No longer. The Internet – and pressure from funding agencies, who are questioning why commercial publishers are making money from government-funded research by restricting access to it – is making access to scientific results a reality. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has just issued a report describing the far-reaching consequences of this. The report, by John Houghton of Victoria University in Australia and Graham Vickery of the OECD, makes heavy reading for publishers who have, so far, made handsome profits. But it goes further than that. It signals a change in what has, until now, been a key element of scientific endeavor.
The value of knowledge and the return on the public investment in research depends, in part, upon wide distribution and ready access. It is big business. In America, the core scientific publishing market is estimated at between $7 billion and $11 billion. The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers says that there are more than 2,000 publishers worldwide specializing in these subjects. They publish more than 1.2 million articles each year in some 16,000 journals.
This is now changing. According to the OECD report, some 75% of scholarly journals are now online. Entirely new business models are emerging; three main ones were identified by the report’s authors. There is the so-called big deal, where institutional subscribers pay for access to a collection of online journal titles through site-licensing agreements. There is open-access publishing, typically supported by asking the author (or his employer) to pay for the paper to be published. Finally, there are open-access archives, where organizations such as universities or international laboratories support institutional repositories. Other models exist that are hybrids of these three, such as delayed open-access, where journals allow only subscribers to read a paper for the first six months, before making it freely available to everyone who wishes to see it. All this could change the traditional form of the peer-review process, at least for the publication of papers.

我搞不明白的是第二题
Which of the following is true of the OECD report?
[A] It criticizes government-funded research.
[B] It introduces an effective means of publication.
[C] It upsets profit-making journal publishers.
[D] It benefits scientific research considerably.

做过此题的同学,一定知道,A和D明显错.而正确答案是C
B翻译成中文应该是"它介绍了一种有效率的出版方式"
黄皮书认为B翻译成中文是"它标志着一种有效的出版方式的开始"
我查了字典introduce并无"标志"的意思呀,一般做"介绍"解
黄皮书又讲解,B之所以错了,是因为"虽然报告介绍了新的出版方式,但是否标志着新出版方式不得而知",由此断定B错,就是说黄皮书认为报告确实介绍了新的出版方式,而B按字典翻译,又确实是"介绍了新的出版方式",只是effective 在原文找不到信息支持,所以不如C那么100%正确,但是勉强B也说的过去!
求老师指点!

我也没看懂张剑老师的解释，单纯说一下我对这道题的理解。B选项属于典型的偷换概念。题目中问的是，关于那份报告，正确的选项是什么。ＡD选项明显是曲解了文章的意思。B选项翻译过来是那份报告介绍了一种有效地出版方式。 原文a report describing the far-reaching consequences of this报告描述了这个影响深远的结果。“这个”指代什么呢？回到上文寻找，THis指代的是The Internet  is making access to scientific results a reality。所以报告不是在介绍英特网，也不是介绍这个出版方式，而是描述因特网使了解科研结果成为可能造成的影响深远的结果。这个结果当然也包括使传统出版的受益者--出版商们忐忑不安。The report makes heavy reading for publishers who have, so far, made handsome profits。C这个选项在原文的中的支持就是这个报告使出版商这个受益群体读报告时感到很沉重。所以C是最佳答案

尽信书不如无书……要相信你的智商跟能力