The mayor can still choose to reward the owner, even if the owner didn’t expect it. (A) doesn’t suggest that the mayor’s action might not be a choice to reward the owner for the support.

This suggests that there can be other motives behind the mayor’s action besides rewarding for political support. After all, (B) shows that the mayor used her influence in a similar way for someone who didn’t support her.

Marion’s theory doesn’t depend on the content of Azco’s channel involving bias. It’s just based on the Azco owner’s support of the mayor. This could be financial support, such as donations to the mayor’s campaign.

This doesn’t suggest that the mayor’s action might not be a reward to the Azco owner. If anything, this provides more reason to think the mayor might be politically motivated.

The number of people watching Mega Cable has no clear impact on Marion’s theory. Her theory doesn’t depend on any assumptions concerning viewership of either Mega Cable or Azco.