Tallulah: The columnist attributes the decline of interest in novels to consumerism, technology, and the laziness of people who prefer watching television to reading a novel. ████████ ██ ████████ ████ ███████████ ███ █████████ ███ ██████████ █████████ █████████ ██ ██ ██████ ████████ ████ ████████████ ███████ ██ ██████████ ██ ████ █████████████████ ████ ██ ██ ██ ███████████ ███ ████████████████████ ████ ████ ███████████ ██████████ ████████████ █████████ ███ █████ ██ █████ █████ ███ █████████ ██████████
Tallulah concludes that the columnist overlooked important evidence in his explanation of the decline of interest in novels. The columnist’s conclusion (which Tallulah references as context for her argument) is that consumerism, technology, and laziness are causing the decline of interest in novels. To support her statement that the columnist’s conclusion is based on incomplete evidence, Tallulah references the difference in quality between contemporary fiction and other types of writing: she says that much of contemporary fiction is low-quality, whereas high quality writing can be found in newspapers, magazines, professional journals, and other types of books.
Tallulah’s conclusion is that the columnist’s idea is based on incomplete evidence: “In reaching this conclusion, the columnist has overlooked important evidence.”
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██████████ ██ ██████████ █████████
Contemporary fiction is █████████ ███████ ██ ██ ████████████ ███████████ ███ ██ ████ ███████ ████████
The columnist's claim ████ ██████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ ████████████ ███████████ ███ ██████████ ██ ██████
The view expressed ██ ███ █████████ ███ ██████ ███████ ███████████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████████
People read as ████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ███ ████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ███ ████ ███ ███ ███████
A large number ██ ████████████ ███████████ ██████████ ████████████ █████████ ███ ██████████ █████ ███ █████████ ██████████