PT135.S1.Q5 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 4 · lr

The conclusion is a hypothesis for why there were so many more anti-freeway interviews than pro-freeway interviews: the TV program is biased against the proposed freeway.

The author assumes that the TV program cherry-picked which interviews to show in order to skew the numbers toward the anti-freeway opinions. This means the author must assume that, in the wider population, a larger percentage of people are actually pro-freeway than the TV program would have us believe. The author may assume that there is a more even split between the pro-freeway and anti-freeway crowds, or he may assume that the pro-freeway crowd outright outnumbers the anti-freeway crowd.

What viewers were aware of is irrelevant to the question of whether the TV program was biased in what it chose to present to those viewers.

Viewers’ expectations of bias do not help to answer the question of whether this TV program is, in actuality, biased. That most viewers expect some level of bias provides no reason to believe that, contrary to the conclusion, this TV program is actually unbiased.

If anything, this strengthens the conclusion. Showing impassioned opposition to the freeway on one hand, and relatively mild support for the freeway on the other, could suggest that the TV program is indeed biased against the freeway.

This means an even higher percentage of people are anti-freeway than what the TV program showed. This denies the author’s assumption that the TV program aired a misleadingly high percentage of anti-freeway opinions. In reality, the program underrepresented anti-freeway opinions.

The TV station’s business interests have no bearing on the argument. The argument is about whether the numbers of pro- and anti-freeway interviews shown should, or should not, lead us to believe that the TV program is biased.

PrepTest 135 - Section 1 - Question 5

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action