The United States government agency responsible for overseeing televi

Question

New Project RC Butler 2019  -  Practice 2 RC Passages Everyday   
Passage # 353, Date : 26-Sep-2019
 This post is a part of New Project RC Butler 2019 .  Click here for Details

The United States government agency responsible for overseeing television and radio broadcasting, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), had an early history of addressing only the concerns of parties with an economic interest in broadcasting—chiefly broadcasting companies. The rights of viewers and listeners were not recognized by the FCC, which regarded them merely as members of the public. Unless citizens’ groups were applying for broadcasting licenses, citizens did not have the standing necessary to voice their views at an FCC hearing. Consequently, the FCC appeared to be exclusively at the service of the broadcasting industry.

A landmark case changed the course of that history. In 1964, a local television station in Jackson, Mississippi was applying for a renewal of its broadcasting license. The United Church of Christ, representing Jackson’s African American population, petitioned the FCC for a hearing about the broadcasting policies of that station. The church charged that the station advocated racial segregation to the point of excluding news and programs supporting integration. Arguing that the church lacked the level of economic interest required for a hearing, the FCC rejected the petition, though it attempted to mollify the church by granting only a short-term, probationary renewal to the station. Further, the FCC claimed that since it accepted the church’s contentions with regard to misconduct on the part of the broadcasters, no hearing was necessary. However, that decision raised a question: If the contentions concerning the station were accepted, why was its license renewed at all? The real reason for denying the church a hearing was more likely the prospect that citizens’ groups representing community preferences would begin to enter the closed worlds of government and industry.

The church appealed the FCC’s decision in court, and in 1967 was granted the right to a public hearing on the station’s request for a long-term license. The hearing was to little avail: the FCC dismissed much of the public input and granted a full renewal to the station. The church appealed again, and this time the judge took the unprecedented step of revoking the station’s license without remand to the FCC, ruling that the church members were performing a public service in voicing the legitimate concerns of the community and, as such, should be accorded the right to challenge the renewal of the station’s broadcasting license.

The case established a formidable precedent for opening up to the public the world of broadcasting. Subsequent rulings have supported the right of the public to question the performance of radio and television licensees before the FCC at renewal time every three years.  Along with racial issues, a range of other matters—from the quality of children’s programming and the portrayal of violence to equal time for opposing political viewpoints—are now discussed at licensing proceedings because of the church’s intervention.    1 
 1. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

(A) Because of the efforts of a church group in challenging an FCC decision, public input is now considered in broadcast licensing proceedings.
(B) Court rulings have forced the FCC to abandon policies that appeared to encourage biased coverage of public issues.
(C) The history of the FCC is important because it explains why government agencies are now forced to respond to public input.
(D) Because it has begun to serve the interests of the public, the FCC is less responsive to the broadcasting industry.
(E) In response to pressure from citizens’ groups, the FCC has decided to open its license renewal hearings to the public.

2 
 2. The author mentions some additional topics now discussed at FCC hearings ( Text in red ) primarily in order to

(A) support the author’s claim that the case helped to open up to the public the world of broadcasting
(B) suggest the level of vigilance that citizens’ groups must maintain with regard to broadcasters
(C) provide an explanation of why the public is allowed to question the performance of broadcasters on such a frequent basis
(D) illustrate other areas of misconduct with which the station discussed in the passage was charged
(E) demonstrate that the station discussed in the passage was not the only one to fall short of its obligation to the public

3 
 3. Which one of the following statements is affirmed by the passage?

(A) The broadcasting industry’s economic goals can be met most easily by minimizing the attention given to the interests of viewers and listeners.
(B) The FCC was advised by broadcasters to bar groups with no economic interest in broadcasting from hearings concerning the broadcasting industry.
(C) The court ruled in the case brought by the United Church of Christ that the FCC had the ultimate authority to decide whether to renew a broadcaster’s license.
(D) Before the United Church of Christ won its case, the FCC would not allow citizens’ groups to speak as members of the public at FCC hearings.
(E) The case brought by the United Church of Christ represents the first time a citizens’ group was successful in getting its concerns about government agencies addressed to its satisfaction.

4 
 4. Based on information presented in the passage, with which one of the following statements would the author be most likely to agree?

(A) If the United Church of Christ had not pursued its case, the FCC would not have been aware of the television station’s broadcasting policies.
(B) By their very nature, industrial and business interests are opposed to public interests.
(C) The recourse of a citizens’ group to the courts represents an effective means of protecting public interests.
(D) Governmental regulation cannot safeguard against individual businesses acting contrary to public interests.
(E) The government cannot be trusted to favor the rights of the public over broadcasters’ economic interests.

5 
 5. The passage suggests that which one of the following has been established by the case discussed in the third paragraph ?

(A) Broadcasters are legally obligated to hold regular meetings at which the public can voice its concerns about broadcasting policies.
(B) Broadcasters are now required by the FCC to consult citizens’ groups when making programming decisions.
(C) Except in cases involving clear misconduct by a broadcaster, the FCC need not seek public input in licensing hearings.
(D) When evaluating the performance of a broadcaster applying for a license renewal, the FCC must obtain information about the preferences of the public.
(E) In FCC licensing proceedings, parties representing community preferences should be granted standing along with those with an economic interest in broadcasting.

Source:   LSAT Official PrepTest 57   ( June 2009 ) 
 Difficulty Level:   650

Hea234ven · Answer

Is there any good explanation for the answer of q 5?

Posted from my mobile device

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hello  ShankSouljaBoi   Hea234ven

Please provide your thoughts on question #5 and i will then explain my reasoning.

Hea234ven · Answer

In E, I didn't see any clear statement that those who have economic interest must be present in the hearing(they may or may not stay in the hearing), while according to the new court decision, FCC must takes the public preferences into account (which is said in D).

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

5. The passage suggests that which one of the following has been established by the case discussed in the third paragraph ?

Difficulty Level:   700-750

Explanation

To answer this question correctly one should understand the question completely. The question is related with the third paragraph, lets read it first.

The  church appealed  the FCC’s decision  in court , and in 1967 was granted the right to a public hearing on the station’s request for a long-term license. The hearing was to little avail: the  FCC dismissed  much of the public input and  granted a full renewal to the station . The church appealed again, and this time the  judge took the unprecedented step of revoking the station’s license without remand to the FCC,  ruling that the church members were performing a  public service  in voicing the legitimate concerns of the community and, as such, should be accorded the  right to challenge the renewal of the station’s  broadcasting license.

Look into the answer choices

(A)  Broadcasters are legally obligated to hold regular meetings at which the public can voice its concerns about broadcasting policies.
This is some sort of unrelated information and in my point of view it was out of contest.

(B)  Broadcasters are now required by the FCC to consult citizens’ groups when making programming decisions.
No such information is available in third paragraph so this is also out of contest.

(C)  Except in cases involving clear misconduct by a broadcaster, the FCC need not seek public input in licensing hearings.
In the third paragraph, at first FCC accepted the church appeal after court intervention but FCC didn't value to the opinion of church community and at second court without going to FCC ruled in the favor of Church members. Overall it looks like the FCC considered that channel has not misconducted that is why it was granted license by FCC and FCC revoke the license only when some serious type of misconduct happened. This option is a bit tricky but we cannot conclude this all without the help of text in the passage. and this is out too.

(D)  When evaluating the performance of a broadcaster applying for a license renewal, the FCC must obtain information about the preferences of the public.
With regard to the third para and requirement of the question this option is rather Opposite. This option states what ought to be but in different direction. It is not necessarily that  "Preference of the public"   =  Church members agenda. "Preference of the public" could be an extreme scenario which actually may not practicable. So it is out.

(E)  In  FCC licensing proceedings , parties representing community preferences should be  granted standing  along with those with an economic interest in broadcasting.
parties representing community preferences  =  Church members
those with an economic interest  =  Channel itself.

Answer: E

Hope it helps

MikeScarn · Answer

#5   (D)   vs   (E)

(D) Says that the   FCC     must obtain   information about the preferences of the public. Where in the 3rd paragraph does it say that it is the  FCC 's responsibility to obtain the preferences of the public?

The  judge  just ruled that the public had the "right to challenge the renewal of the station’s broadcasting license."

The FCC is not responsible for surveying the public.   The result of this whole debacle was that the public now has a voice in the matter.

In paragraph 2: "Arguing that the church  lacked  the level of  economic interest  required for a hearing, the FCC rejected the petition"

Basically, the FCC used to dismiss the community groups because they didn't have an economic interest in the matter.

But now, after the Judge's ruling in Paragraph 3, community groups are allowed to "voice legitimate concerns of the community and, as such, are accorded the right to challenge the renewal of the station’s broadcasting license."

(E)   is exactly correct.   Both the  community  and those with economic interest in broadcasting have a seat at the table in these FCC licensing proceedings.

Kanvi · Answer

SajjadAhmad
please explain question 3

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Read lines 3-9 of second paragraph

The United Church of Christ, representing Jackson’s African American population, petitioned the FCC for a hearing about the broadcasting policies of that station. The church charged that the station advocated racial segregation to the point of excluding news and programs supporting integration. Arguing that the church lacked the level of economic interest required for a hearing, the FCC rejected the petition

Then lines 1-3 of third paragraph

The church appealed the FCC’s decision in court, and in 1967 was granted the right to a public hearing on the station’s request for a long-term license.

This all text leads to the answer:   D

saurabh9gupta · Answer

SajjadAhmad  - can you please post the detailed explanation of question 4. I didn't find any reference to the said part in the RC.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

This is an inference question, the required answer would not necessarily available by the explicit text. You must need to understand the requirement of the question and then translate the information. This question basically want to know how much you have understand the passage.

(C)  The recourse of a citizens’ group to the courts represents an effective means of protecting public interests.

The recourse of a citizens’ group =  The actions of the United Church of Christ 
an effective means of protecting public interests. =  United Church of Christs went to the court, file a case and win it for the good of general public.

Now tell me whether you have found the above text in green?

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

Subsequent rulings have supported the right of the public  to question the performance of radio and television licensees before the FCC at renewal time every three years.

Hope this helps

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

SajjadAhmad

4. Based on information presented in the passage, with which one of the following statements would the author be most likely to agree?

I have a question, how to tackle these kind of questions, Its diffciult to find the respective part from the entire passage and also difficult to remember. 
I got this one Incorrect, could find the correct answer only later in review.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

This type of question can be crushed by taking small notes, if you are not used to making notes (I am also not) you should read the passage slowly, slowly and very carefully and translating into your native word simultaneously (Problem of most non-natives of English language).

Always avoid:

1. Could be true answer
2. written but unrelated information (The text written in the passage but is not related to that particular question)
3. Half true half wrong answers
4. Extreme answer (Mostly starts with Many, Much, all, some and so on...)

jarbit · Answer

Hello, can anyone give me the explanation of question number 2?

taorishrushti · Answer

What should've been my approach for Q3 and Q.5? I took a lot of time with a wrong answers. In which category do these questions fall respectively? I mean are they inferences type questions or supporting idea?

My approach for the whole passage - I read out the questions first, just in order to make sure of the type of questions. I found more of conclusive and detailed type (rather than factual), so I preferred to read the passage deeply. But still I missed these 2 questions and just a sec after marking option for Q 3, I realized that I had marked wrong. 
How should my approach be while solving such questions? Pre - Options reading wouldn't have helped probably.

Thank you!

Saasingh · Answer

Hello,

Q3 is a detailed question. 
To handle detail questions, try to take a mental note of locations where this detail could be found. For this you need to do a very good, contextual read of the passage. That way, when you encounter a detail question, you would need to do a slight re-read of that location(one line above and below the line where you find this detail).

Q5 is more of a inference question. 
You need to know the subtle shift of language. What works is that you could POE out of scope answers choices. And for the remaining contenders (usually one can POE 3 options straight away if you have good understanding of the passage), you can perhaps again re-read one or two lines above/below, and look for the subtle differences.
In this question, contenders are D and E. Then you can have a close reading of both options. Clearly D talks about "preference of people". But, that's not what the church's contention was about. They had "legitimate concerns about community". When we say I have a legitimate concern on some matter, it's not the same as having a preference. Preference is a "choice". If not fulfilled, the church should not feel bad. But "legitimate concern" is a very strong statement. It is something that MUST be listened to by the broadcasters. This "legitimate concerns" thing is evidently better displayed in option E (the right of standing).

Anshuman0902 · Answer

hello ! 
can anyone explain me question number 2?

GMATNinja · Answer

Question 2 
 
To determine the purpose of a specific piece of the passage, take a look at the broader structure of the passage as a whole. Why did the author write each paragraph?

Paragraph 1 : The author  introduces an issue.  Specifically, that the "FCC appeared to be exclusively at the service of the broadcasting industry" and did not allow input from the public.

Paragraph 2 : The author  introduces a "landmark case" that addressed this issue.  A public entity (a church) tried to get involved in FCC processes by challenging a segregationist TV station.

Paragraph 3 : The author  discusses the outcome of the "landmark case."  A judge ruled that "should be accorded the right to challenge the renewal of the station’s broadcasting license." In other words, the public should have a say in FCC business.

Paragraph 4 : The author discusses  further implications of the case's outcome.  The public doesn't just have a voice in racial matters -- now the public can chime in on all sorts of other issues.This is where we find the the "red text" mentioned in question 2:

"Along with racial issues, a range of other matters—from the quality of children’s programming and the portrayal of violence to equal time for opposing political viewpoints—are now discussed at licensing proceedings because of the church’s intervention."

The overall purpose of the passage is to explore how the "landmark case" forced the FCC to accept input from the public. The red text in Paragraph 4 provides further information about how the case gave the public a voice in a wide array of issues.

Now, onto the answer choices. Is the purpose of the red text to:
 
This fits pretty well with our analysis. The author's overall purpose of writing the passage is to show that the landmark case opened up FCC proceedings to the public. The red text supports this claim by showing that the case had wide implications -- the public now has a voice in all sorts of issues.

Keep (A).

The author doesn't imply that citizens' groups MUST maintain a high level of vigilance. Instead, he/she explores  how they got the right  to weigh in on licensing procedures.

(B) is out.

The red text give us  examples of issues  that the public now has a voice in. It doesn't provide an explanation of WHY the public can question the performance of broadcasters once every three years.

Eliminate (C).

The red text doesn't specify that "the station   discussed in the passage  " was charged with all of these areas of misconduct. Instead, it says that these issues "are discussed at licensing proceedings" in a general sense. It is possible that the station discussed in the passage was ONLY charged with racial issues, and that OTHER STATIONS were charged with poor quality children's programming, etc.

Get rid of (D).

The red text does seem to imply that other stations did things that concerned the public. But is that the  primary purpose  of the red text?

Nope, it's not. In the context of the author's argument, the red text is included to further the discussion about  broadcasting issues opening up to public input . So, while other stations might fall short of their obligation to the public, the author doesn't include the red text to show that other stations kind of suck. He/she includes it as a supporting point about the role of the landmark case in changing FCC proceedings.

(E) is out, and (A) is the correct answer to question 2.

I hope that helps!

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

The United States government agency responsible for overseeing televi

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

The United States government agency responsible for overseeing televi

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards