CR: Resolve Paradox

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:15 am
Location: India
Thanked: 13 times

CR: Resolve Paradox

by gauravgundal » Sun May 15, 2011 7:09 pm
Source : 800-test prep

There has been a sharp decline in revenue from television advertisements in the state, and three of the main networks are considering major cuts in their programming and news offerings. At the same time, residents of the state are watching more TV than ever, and many smaller local channels are flourishing financially.
Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent contradiction above?
A. Six months ago, the three main networks agreed to cut in half the rates charged for 15- and 30- second advertisements.
B. Many viewers in the state have started recording their favorite programs to watch at a later time, allowing them to skip over commercials.
C. The survival rate for newly-launched local channels is higher this year than it has been in previous years.
D. An increasing percentage of state residents are turning to online sources for the news.E. Many smaller channels are largely funded by public donations.
E. You are asked to explain the seeming paradox of flourishing local stations set aside huge cuts in advertising revenue.

[spoiler]OA: E[/spoiler]

I am confused on how the author track down to answer [spoiler]choice (E)[/spoiler]
E states only about the public donations to smaller channels,it doesn't mention about why there was rise in people watching T.V.
E resolved only a part of the argument.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:13 am
Thanked: 1 times

by rk10 » Mon May 16, 2011 12:05 am
E. You are asked to explain the seeming paradox of flourishing local stations set aside huge cuts in advertising revenue

This option means that - The Argument is saying that the local stations have huge cuts in advertising Revenues as well ( which is what makes this option the correct one)

Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Mon May 16, 2011 3:53 am
rk10 wrote:E. You are asked to explain the seeming paradox of flourishing local stations set aside huge cuts in advertising revenue

This option means that - The Argument is saying that the local stations have huge cuts in advertising Revenues as well ( which is what makes this option the correct one)
So what if the local stations have cuts too or whatever .
E doesnt explain paradox
On 1 hand you have the drop in revenues from advertising and the cuts in programming by the 3 main companies . On the other hand you have increase in number television usage .
E doesnt reconcile the 2 contradictory positions
BTW never heard of 800 test prep
I Seek Explanations Not Answers

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:18 am
Thanked: 1 times

by Carcass » Mon May 16, 2011 6:52 am
for me is clear D.

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Mon May 16, 2011 7:52 am
gauravgundal wrote:Source : 800-test prep

There has been a sharp decline in revenue from television advertisements in the state, and three of the main networks are considering major cuts in their programming and news offerings. At the same time, residents of the state are watching more TV than ever, and many smaller local channels are flourishing financially.

Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent contradiction above?

A. Six months ago, the three main networks agreed to cut in half the rates charged for 15- and 30- second advertisements.

B. Many viewers in the state have started recording their favorite programs to watch at a later time, allowing them to skip over commercials.

C. The survival rate for newly-launched local channels is higher this year than it has been in previous years.

D. An increasing percentage of state residents are turning to online sources for the news.

E. Many smaller channels are largely funded by public donations.


[spoiler]OA: E[/spoiler]

I am confused on how the author track down to answer [spoiler]choice (E)[/spoiler]
E states only about the public donations to smaller channels,it doesn't mention about why there was rise in people watching T.V.
E resolved only a part of the argument.
Hi,

I'm not sure who "800 Test Prep" is, but this is a poorly constructed question.

As noted by a couple of other posters, E explains only part of the issue - and only explains that part partially. E may explain why those stations aren't going under, but just because they get public funding that doesn't logically lead to them flourishing and certainly doesn't explain why major stations are losing money even though more people are watching TV.

A proper answer should explain all of the issues, not just sort of explain 1/4 of them.
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course