Critical Reasoning

The director of programming at NNN, the National News Network, proclaimed that, despite charges to the contrary, the Network does not have a conservative bias. The director acknowledged that, when a liberal news personality was recently added to the Network, an additional conservative news program was also established. However, the director argued that far from demonstrating any bias, these actions reflect a commitment to presenting a balanced perspective in interpreting current events.

Which of the following pieces of information would be most useful in evaluating the validity of the programming director’s argument?

1)The Network has established an additional liberal news program whenever an additional conservative news personality has been added.

2)The Network airs a program focused largely on the opinions of its viewers on contemporary issues.

3) The newly added liberal news personality came from a rival network with an acknowledged liberal bias.

4) The newly added liberal news personality has indicated that he has not felt any editorial pressure in his new environment.

5) The viewer ratings of the Network have been lower this past year than in previous years.

IMO A

This validates the director's argument and proves that the network does not have a conservative bias.

IMO A

whats wrong with D???

Difficult one

My take on C

IMO A

A bias person is countered by a biased program (!!); therefore if another person of counter bias is countered by another counter-bias program, we are even - the programs even out each other and the two biased persons even out each other - GREAT

What is not so great is this type of crappy questions.

raunekk wrote:whats wrong with D???

Even i also choose D...but oa is A.....

Reason why D is wrong is----It is talking about single personality..the experience of one employee does not address the overall programming of the Network. NARROW SCOPE is the flaw......

I will Go with option A in this case