Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 18:53 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 18:53
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,355
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 99,964
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,355
Kudos: 778,080
 [12]
Kudos
Add Kudos
12
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
nightblade354
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,781
Own Kudos:
6,818
 [5]
Given Kudos: 3,304
Status:He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Going to Business School -- Corruptus in Extremis
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,781
Kudos: 6,818
 [5]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
ArunSharma12
Joined: 25 Oct 2015
Last visit: 20 Jul 2022
Posts: 513
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 74
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V38 (Online)
GPA: 4
Products:
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V38 (Online)
Posts: 513
Kudos: 1,019
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
jpan
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 26 Jan 2019
Last visit: 12 Jun 2022
Posts: 74
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 24
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
IMO A. Argument states that media covers crime more now than it did 10 years ago, not because of increased crime rate, but because of increased audience interest. The proposition plays the role of supporting the conclusion. E comes close but it's not just an alternative explanation. The author clearly negates the other cause for the effect in the argument.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
ksht
Joined: 20 Mar 2020
Last visit: 05 Feb 2021
Posts: 75
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 379
Posts: 75
Kudos: 51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Premise : public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime. Media’s decisions about what issues to cover depends on the interests of their audiences
Conclusion: The media now devote more coverage to crime than they did ten years ago even though crime rate has not increased


The proposition that the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime plays which one of the following roles in the argument?


(A) It supports the conclusion that the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies. - Correct premise supports the conclusion

(B) It is presented as evidence that the media decide what to cover and to what extent to cover it depending on the interest of the public. - Its not a evidence

(C) It is a counterexample to the claim that the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. - not a counterexample

(D) It is a generalization based on the claim that the crime rate has increased over the past ten years. - not a generalization

(E) It is offered as an alternative explanation of why the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. - only one explanation is given
User avatar
TarPhi
Joined: 24 Sep 2019
Last visit: 18 Mar 2021
Posts: 125
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 171
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36
Products:
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36
Posts: 125
Kudos: 106
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja, eakabuah, nightblade354

Can you please explain the difference between B and E?
How is it an alternative explanation?
avatar
gmat2020trgt770
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 05 Sep 2019
Last visit: 06 Jun 2021
Posts: 65
Own Kudos:
86
 [1]
Given Kudos: 30
Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.45
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V38
Posts: 65
Kudos: 86
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Conclusion : The media now devote more coverage to crime than they did ten years ago not because the crime rate has increased, but rather because the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime.

Ques : The proposition that the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

Pre-thinking : The proposition "public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime plays" is presented as an explanation to why "The media now devote more coverage to crime".

Lets look at the options now :
(A) It supports the conclusion that the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies. Incorrect because of the following reasons:
(i) The conlusion is not that "the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies"
(ii) The second part of statement "the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies" is not mentioned in anywhere in the passage.

(B) It is presented as evidence that the media decide what to cover and to what extent to cover it depending on the interest of the public. - Incorrect because it is not presented as an evidence rather as an explanation of why the coverage has increased than 10 years ago.

(C) It is a counterexample to the claim that the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. - Incorrect because it is not an counterexample to "media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago" but rather an explanation.

(D) It is a generalization based on the claim that the crime rate has increased over the past ten years. - Incorrect because this is irrelavant and it is not a generalisation.

(E) It is offered as an alternative explanation of why the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. - Correct because it is indeed as an alternate explanation for the fact that "he media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago"
User avatar
TarPhi
Joined: 24 Sep 2019
Last visit: 18 Mar 2021
Posts: 125
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 171
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36
Products:
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36
Posts: 125
Kudos: 106
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gmat2020trgt740
Conclusion : The media now devote more coverage to crime than they did ten years ago not because the crime rate has increased, but rather because the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime.

Ques : The proposition that the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

Pre-thinking : The proposition "public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime plays" is presented as an explanation to why "The media now devote more coverage to crime".

Lets look at the options now :
(A) It supports the conclusion that the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies. Incorrect because of the following reasons:
(i) The conlusion is not that "the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies"
(ii) The second part of statement "the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies" is not mentioned in anywhere in the passage.

(B) It is presented as evidence that the media decide what to cover and to what extent to cover it depending on the interest of the public. - Incorrect because it is not presented as an evidence rather as an explanation of why the coverage has increased than 10 years ago.

(C) It is a counterexample to the claim that the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. - Incorrect because it is not an counterexample to "media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago" but rather an explanation.

(D) It is a generalization based on the claim that the crime rate has increased over the past ten years. - Incorrect because this is irrelavant and it is not a generalisation.

(E) It is offered as an alternative explanation of why the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. - Correct because it is indeed as an alternate explanation for the fact that "he media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago"


Thanks mate! Evidence vs Explanation & 10 years ago is also mentioned. Cheers,
avatar
TheStoryteller
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 25 Apr 2020
Last visit: 22 Feb 2025
Posts: 58
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 137
Location: India
GMAT 1: 790 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q167 V163
GPA: 3
GMAT 1: 790 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q167 V163
Posts: 58
Kudos: 77
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Spent some time thinking between A and E. Now, let's see.
(A) It supports the conclusion that the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies.
--Tempting at first read. But we don't know if the crime rate is actually high enough to justify the new increased coverage. (Maybe the crime new were underrepresented before.)
(B) It is presented as evidence that the media decide what to cover and to what extent to cover it depending on the interest of the public.
--Not an evidence as it gives no proof.
(C) It is a counterexample to the claim that the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago.
--Not a counterexample, as it doesn't counter the statement, but explains it.
(D) It is a generalization based on the claim that the crime rate has increased over the past ten years.
-- Wrong. We don't know if crime rates have increased.
(E) It is offered as an alternative explanation of why the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago.
--Correct Answer. It explains the increased media coverage.
User avatar
Sujithz001
Joined: 09 Jun 2024
Last visit: 10 Nov 2025
Posts: 75
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 73
Posts: 75
Kudos: 26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
hey nightblade354

I think there's mistake in your conclusion. It is not that "The media does not devote more time to crime because the crime rate has increased" but "The media devotes more time to crime despite the crime rate not having increased".

KarishmaB chetan2u bb I have 2 doubts,

1. I chose B because the public's increased interest in hearing about the crime is evidence that the media should devote more time to it, right?
2. The E option says "alternate explanation." Can you please help me understand how this is the alternative explanation and what the main explanation is?

Thank you so much in advance!


nightblade354
The media now devote more coverage to crime than they did ten years ago. Yet this is not because the crime rate has increased, but rather because the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime. After all, a crucial factor in the media’s decisions about what issues to cover and to what extent to cover them is the interests of their audiences.

P: A crucial factor in the media’s decisions about what issues to cover and to what extent to cover them is the interests of their audiences.
P: Because the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime
C: The media does not devote more time to crime because the crime rate has increased

We are given an argument that someone believes that news coverage is covering more crime. But we are told that because the media is focused on people's wants, and because people want this, therefore that assessment is wrong. Because one of our argument's premises is the bold portion, we just have to find something that states that it is a premise.

The proposition that the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime plays which one of the following roles in the argument?


(A) It supports the conclusion that the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies. -- The ending is what makes this incorrect. We don't know anything about the crime rate. We are just told that the coverage has nothing to do with it. Out.

(B) It is presented as evidence that the media decide what to cover and to what extent to cover it depending on the interest of the public. -- Let's break this down. It is used as a premise (evidence) that the media covers something based on public interest. Hmm.........somewhat interesting. But look at the above. The "media covers something based on interest" is a premise that is not supported by anything else. Just as the premise about the public's interest in crime has increased is a stand alone premise; neither of these premises are supported, and neither supports the other (The answer choice says that one supports the other). They both support the conclusion. This is why it is so important to understand premises and conclusions. If you can't break them down, you may be lost.

(C) It is a counterexample to the claim that the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. -- Nope. Once more, it is a premise that supports the idea that it does focus on crime but for different reasons. Out.

(D) It is a generalization based on the claim that the crime rate has increased over the past ten years. -- We do not know anything about the crime rate; our argument is about the focus of the media. Simply put, this is just trying to keep you focus on the crime issue. Remember your premises and conclusions and you can eliminate this quickly.

(E) It is offered as an alternative explanation of why the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. -- Perfect. We are told X, but then we are given a different rationale for it. This links the premise to the conclusion and this is our answer.

nightblade354
The media now devote more coverage to crime than they did ten years ago. Yet this is not because the crime rate has increased, but rather because the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime. After all, a crucial factor in the media’s decisions about what issues to cover and to what extent to cover them is the interests of their audiences.

P: A crucial factor in the media’s decisions about what issues to cover and to what extent to cover them is the interests of their audiences.
P: Because the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime
C: The media does not devote more time to crime because the crime rate has increased

We are given an argument that someone believes that news coverage is covering more crime. But we are told that because the media is focused on people's wants, and because people want this, therefore that assessment is wrong. Because one of our argument's premises is the bold portion, we just have to find something that states that it is a premise.

The proposition that the public is now more interested in reading and hearing about crime plays which one of the following roles in the argument?


(A) It supports the conclusion that the media now devote more coverage to crime than the crime rate alone justifies. -- The ending is what makes this incorrect. We don't know anything about the crime rate. We are just told that the coverage has nothing to do with it. Out.

(B) It is presented as evidence that the media decide what to cover and to what extent to cover it depending on the interest of the public. -- Let's break this down. It is used as a premise (evidence) that the media covers something based on public interest. Hmm.........somewhat interesting. But look at the above. The "media covers something based on interest" is a premise that is not supported by anything else. Just as the premise about the public's interest in crime has increased is a stand alone premise; neither of these premises are supported, and neither supports the other (The answer choice says that one supports the other). They both support the conclusion. This is why it is so important to understand premises and conclusions. If you can't break them down, you may be lost.

(C) It is a counterexample to the claim that the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. -- Nope. Once more, it is a premise that supports the idea that it does focus on crime but for different reasons. Out.

(D) It is a generalization based on the claim that the crime rate has increased over the past ten years. -- We do not know anything about the crime rate; our argument is about the focus of the media. Simply put, this is just trying to keep you focus on the crime issue. Remember your premises and conclusions and you can eliminate this quickly.

(E) It is offered as an alternative explanation of why the media devote more coverage to crime now than they did ten years ago. -- Perfect. We are told X, but then we are given a different rationale for it. This links the premise to the conclusion and this is our answer.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
188 posts