PrepTest 110, Section 3, Question 26
The media now devote more coverage to crime(58 more words not shown)
The proposition that the public(20 more words not shown)
- AIt supports the(16 more words not shown)
- BIt is presented(23 more words not shown)
- CIt is a(19 more words not shown)
- DIt is a(16 more words not shown)
- EIt is offered(20 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
More coverage of crime could make us wonder whether there's more crime to cover. The author proposes a different reason: the public is more interested in it.
That distinction matters. The amount of attention a subject receives needn't track how often the underlying events occur. If editors respond to audience interests, increased interest could explain increased coverage. That is how the final sentence supports the author's proposed explanation.
Be careful about what the author rejects. Saying the extra coverage isn't because the crime rate increased does not establish that the crime rate stayed the same or fell. The claim concerns what explains the coverage. We should not turn it into a broader claim about the actual crime trend.
What we’re looking for
The question asks what role the statement about increased public interest plays. I'd first describe it as the author's reason for the change in coverage. The answer should capture that explanatory job and distinguish it from the general claim about how the media choose their topics.
Working the answers
- A
The argument doesn't conclude that the media provide more coverage than the crime rate justifies. That would be a judgment about how much coverage is appropriate. Here, the author explains why coverage has increased without establishing what amount would be justified.
- B
This turns the support around. The general claim that media decisions depend on audience interests is offered to help explain why increased public interest would lead to more crime coverage. The statement about this particular increase in interest isn't being used as evidence to establish that general claim. Ask which statement is explaining or supporting which.
- C
The author accepts that crime receives more coverage now. The public-interest statement helps explain that accepted change; it isn't a case showing that the change did not occur. An explanation of an observation and a counterexample to it do different jobs.
- D
The statement about public interest isn't a generalization derived from an increased crime rate. The author sets aside crime-rate growth as the explanation of increased coverage. Nothing in the argument reasons from a rise in crime to a general claim about public interest.
- ECorrect
Increased public interest is offered as an alternative to increased crime as the explanation of increased coverage. This makes our rough description more precise: the statement isn't just a reason somewhere in the argument; it identifies the cause the author favors over another possible cause.
The final sentence then gives us a reason to take that explanation seriously: audience interests are a crucial factor in the media's choices about coverage. Keeping those two roles separate also shows why B has the support running in the wrong direction.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.