GMAT Essays (AWA)

Task

The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city's council on the arts:
"In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual
arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people
visiting our city's art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports
public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we
can expect that attendance at our city's art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city's funds
for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television."

Answer

The argument implies that a decrease in corporate funding for visual arts programs on public television will decrease the number of people visiting the city's arts museums. Although it seems logically reasonable at first sight, some of the assumptions that the argument relies on can be easily brought under debate.

First, the argument assumes that the increase in number of art museum visitors was caused by the increase in number of residents who watched visual arts television programs. However, there is no clear evidence pointing to this fact. What if the causation is the other way around and the residents' higher interest in arts was cultivated by more visits at the museums which in turn could have increased the willingness to watch also art television shows. Clearly, in this case corporations should have directed their marketing funding efforts on those people going to the museum.

Second, what seems to be causation in the argument can be as a matter of fact pure correlation between events. The increase in both numbers of public television viewers and museum visitors could have been generated by a wider national wide campaign to increase art awareness among the population. This could have been created through the means of various art events such as concerts or public shows or higher awareness efforts during art classes in schools and universities. The conclusion of the argument could have been strengthen if a more solid assumption were implied in terms of causation.

Third, the author assumes that the budget cuts for public television art programs will lead to fewer numbers of art museum visitors. This again does not take into consideration all aspects that make residents go to the museum. If their motivation comes from other sources such as books, personal research, discussions with other people with same interests then the reduction in budget might have no impact. Moreover, the severe cuts for public television does not immediately imply that there are no other funds allocated or increased for other art awareness campaigns.

To sum it up, the conclusion mentioned in the memorandum by the city's council is based on weak and debatable assumptions. If the argument provided a more in depth view regarding viewers' motivation to go to the museum, art awareness initiatives in the past five years or how the funds are allocated it could have provided a more solid basis to substantiate the argument.