The format of network television news programs generally allows advocates of a point of view only 30 seconds to conve...

Naz September 22, 2014

Here we have a Weaken question. There are two ways to weaken an argument: (1) show that a premise is false and (2) show that the conclusion does not follow.

The conclusion of the argument is: "in contrast to regular newspaper reading, regular watching of network television news programs increases the tendency to think of public issues in oversimplified terms."

Why? We are told that the format of network television news programs generally allows advocates of a point of view only 30 seconds to convey their message. As a result, regular watchers become accustomed to thinking of issues in terms of only slogans and catch phrases; thus, the expectation of careful discussion of public issues slowly vanishes from their awareness. On the other hand, newspapers allow for readers to pursue details of stories headed by the most integral facts, having the opposite effect on regular readers: maintaining the expectation of careful discussion of public issues.

The argument is comparing the effect of regular network television news watching and regular newspaper reading on people.

Answer choice (A) states: "Regular watchers of network television news programs are much more likely than other people to be habitual readers of newspapers."

So, if regular watchers of network television news programs are much more likely than other people to be habitual readers of newspapers, then these regular watchers of network television will reap the benefits of habitually reading newspapers: expecting careful discussion of public issues. So, it no longer follows that regular watching of network television news programs increases the tendency to think of public issues in oversimplified terms, since these regular watchers are also regular readers of the newspaper, which instills in them the awareness for the need of careful discussion. Thus, answer choice (A) is the correct because it seriously weakens the argument.

Answer choice (D) states: "Television news reports tend to devote equal time to discussion of opposing views."

We are told that television news programs generally allow advocates of a point of view only 30 seconds to convey their message. If answer choice (D) were correct, then both sides of the issue would have an equal time to discuss their views, i.e. they would both have 30 seconds. But, even if opponents of a view were allotted the same time, this does not remedy the issue that 30 seconds only allows for issues to be thought of in terms of slogans and catch phrase, which gradually dwindles one's expectation of careful discussion of public issues. Therefore, this answer choice does not weaken the argument.

Hope that clears things up! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

RyanSpencer May 29, 2019

But, like the original question in the feed, it is talking about methods... watching tv could very well increase their tendency, but reading a newspaper counteracts that... I'm not sure I understand how A is the correct answer.

Victoria May 29, 2019

Hello @RyanSpencer,

We are looking for the answer choice that weakens the argument made in the passage.

The passage argues that, in contrast to regular newspaper reading, regular watching of television news programs increases the tendency to think of public issues in oversimplified terms. The evidence used to support this conclusion is that network television news programs usually allow advocates of a position only 30 seconds to convey their view and, as such, regular watchers of network television news programs become accustomed to this simplification of public issues.

The passage also notes that newspaper stories lead readers to pursue details of stories headed by the most important facts and that this causes the public to remain invested in and expect careful discussion of public issues.

So, we are looking for the answer choice that, if true, weakens the author's ability to conclude that, in contrast to regular newspaper reading, regular watching of television news programs increases the tendency to think of public issues in oversimplified terms.

A is correct because it casts doubt on the author's conclusion. If those who regularly watch network television news programs are, in general, also those who regularly read the newspaper, then they will be influenced by both the oversimplification of public issues on network television news programs and the careful discussion of public issues presented in newspapers.

The conclusion is worded a bit confusingly when connected with answer choice A as the conclusion refers to the act of watching television as opposed to the television viewers themselves; however, if regular watching of network television news programs generally accompanies regular newspaper reading, then it cannot be definitively concluded that regular watching of these television programs increases the tendency to think of public issues in oversimplified terms as the effect of television is obscured by the effect of newspaper reading.

In addition to this, the connection between regular television watching and regular newspaper reading no longer allows the author of the passage to draw a direct contrast between the two - as they do in their conclusion - as the effects of each medium on the viewer/reader are impacted by the effects of the other.

Hope this is helpful! Please let us know if you have any further questions.

dfernandez October 29, 2019

Is this a real LSAT question?

Victoria March 2, 2020

Hi David,

Yes this is from the June 1994 LSAT.

All of our practice questions are either drawn directly from or closely modelled after questions from previous LSATs.