I kept making silly assumptions with this one... gotta practice more!

Working on this question while I have a shrimp farm is a weird feeling to say the least

This took a while for me too, I think because I kept 'reversing' the logic which put my mind into a loop. But to break it down... Premise: Of the interviews shown, those conducted with people against the new freeway outnumbered those conducted with people for it 2:1.

Conclusion: The television program is therefore biased against the proposed freeway.

• A. Nothing in the stimulus indicates that the viewers (NOT interviewees) being aware of the freeway controversy = affects => how biased the TV program is against the proposed freeway. Cross this out

• B. Again, nothing in the stimulus indicates that viewers’ expectation of bias has a relationship with the bias of a TV program. OUT

• C. Okay, we’re getting closer, but if this was true, this would support the argument, not weaken it. We can keep this in reserve and see if there’s another answer that is better.

• D. Better than C, so we can strike it out. The fact that there were 2x as many people before the program aired indicates that the ratio of those against the freeway versus those for was not because the TV program had a bias/selectively chose their interviewees. This greatly weakens the argument.

• E. If true, would support the argument. If the TV has a fiscal interest that would be harmed by the freeway construction, they would naturally be biased against it, which supports the argument.

Got my first 5/5 on this one!!!

@Jurcis 6 months late, but I also use venn diagrams and they help a lot!

@jlj22 this is also what i did as well! i think it could work logically

JY must be a huge cat person lmfao