It is currently 17 Dec 2017, 04:14

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

TV is the future because it remains king of all media

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 706

Kudos [?]: 169 [1], given: 138

TV is the future because it remains king of all media [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jul 2017, 02:40
1
This post received
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  85% (hard)

Question Stats:

45% (01:31) correct 55% (01:44) wrong based on 173 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

TV is the future because it remains king of all media. While handsets get hyped, the typical U.S. consumer watches more than 5 hours of TV a day, according to Nielsen, and even younger adults 18 to 24 years old—the supposed digital generation—spend 3 hours and 30 minutes on televisions daily compared to only 49 minutes on the Web and 20 minutes on mobile.

The above argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

a) The argument fails to look into the possible causes of higher consumption of TV over other media
b) The argument makes an assumption that the consumer preferences will not change significantly over time without looking at the past trends.
c) The argument fails to consider that the average figures may not apply to every consumer of media
d) The argument does not talk about population below 18 years of age, which will soon be part of the so called “digital generation”
e) The argument proposes that the same cause and effect may apply in the future as in the past without even looking at the possibility of existence of cause in the future.

[Reveal] Spoiler: My Understanding
I am confused between B and D. The sample of the population interviewed is also a problem here. I agree "B" is also correct, but "D" is also a valid flaw in the argument. Why can't D be the answer?
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Helpful links:
1. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
2. LSAT RC compilation
3. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
4. QOTD RC (Carcass)
5. Challange OG RC

Kudos [?]: 169 [1], given: 138

2 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 06 Jul 2016
Posts: 437

Kudos [?]: 129 [2], given: 98

Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: TV is the future because it remains king of all media [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jul 2017, 02:56
2
This post received
KUDOS
gmatexam439 wrote:
TV is the future because it remains king of all media. While handsets get hyped, the typical U.S. consumer watches more than 5 hours of TV a day, according to Nielsen, and even younger adults 18 to 24 years old—the supposed digital generation—spend 3 hours and 30 minutes on televisions daily compared to only 49 minutes on the Web and 20 minutes on mobile.

The above argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

a) The argument fails to look into the possible causes of higher consumption of TV over other media
b) The argument makes an assumption that the consumer preferences will not change significantly over time without looking at the past trends.
c) The argument fails to consider that the average figures may not apply to every consumer of media
d) The argument does not talk about population below 18 years of age, which will soon be part of the so called “digital generation”
e) The argument proposes that the same cause and effect may apply in the future as in the past without even looking at the possibility of existence of cause in the future.

[Reveal] Spoiler: My Understanding
I am confused between B and D. The sample of the population interviewed is also a problem here. I agree "B" is also correct, but "D" is also a valid flaw in the argument. Why can't D be the answer?


Good Question. 2 minutes to solve this question. I was stuck between B & E.

Below is my thought process while answering this question:

Breaking down the argument
TV is king in the future because it is king now (Bold Claim)
Avg. consumer watches X amount to TV, and even the current generation watches more TV than spending time on other forms of media.

Assumption - According to the author, this is happening now, and will likely happen in the future no matter what.

Breaking down the answer choices
A - This is immediately out. Even if we know why consumption is high, it won't help explain if it will remain high or fall.
B - This seems like a good one. Bold claim made without looking at past trends of TV's role in media. If the avg. consumer watched for e.g. 7 hours of TV a day, and now it's at 5 hours a day, and if the younger children watched 5 hours before, and now are only watching 3 hours a day, there is a definitive downward trend, and the argument will fall apart. KEEP!
C - Ok, so let's apply the avg. applies to all media. It still doesn't help me figure out if TV will remain king, or fall off the grid.
D - This seems like a trick answer choice that's adding another group into the mix, which wasn't part of the initial argument. Also, if we consider people below 18, and they are watching 2 hours of TV, it still doesn't give me any indication till I look at a trend line from the past. So B still seems better. Out.
E - For me, there was no cause and effect in the argument and hence I eliminated it

So B is the answer.
But I would love any insights into option E.
_________________

Put in the work, and that dream score is yours!

Kudos [?]: 129 [2], given: 98

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 02 Apr 2014
Posts: 272

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 568

Re: TV is the future because it remains king of all media [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Nov 2017, 03:06
akshayk wrote:
gmatexam439 wrote:
TV is the future because it remains king of all media. While handsets get hyped, the typical U.S. consumer watches more than 5 hours of TV a day, according to Nielsen, and even younger adults 18 to 24 years old—the supposed digital generation—spend 3 hours and 30 minutes on televisions daily compared to only 49 minutes on the Web and 20 minutes on mobile.

The above argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

a) The argument fails to look into the possible causes of higher consumption of TV over other media
b) The argument makes an assumption that the consumer preferences will not change significantly over time without looking at the past trends.
c) The argument fails to consider that the average figures may not apply to every consumer of media
d) The argument does not talk about population below 18 years of age, which will soon be part of the so called “digital generation”
e) The argument proposes that the same cause and effect may apply in the future as in the past without even looking at the possibility of existence of cause in the future.

[Reveal] Spoiler: My Understanding
I am confused between B and D. The sample of the population interviewed is also a problem here. I agree "B" is also correct, but "D" is also a valid flaw in the argument. Why can't D be the answer?


Good Question. 2 minutes to solve this question. I was stuck between B & E.

Below is my thought process while answering this question:

Breaking down the argument
TV is king in the future because it is king now (Bold Claim)
Avg. consumer watches X amount to TV, and even the current generation watches more TV than spending time on other forms of media.

Assumption - According to the author, this is happening now, and will likely happen in the future no matter what.

Breaking down the answer choices
A - This is immediately out. Even if we know why consumption is high, it won't help explain if it will remain high or fall.
B - This seems like a good one. Bold claim made without looking at past trends of TV's role in media. If the avg. consumer watched for e.g. 7 hours of TV a day, and now it's at 5 hours a day, and if the younger children watched 5 hours before, and now are only watching 3 hours a day, there is a definitive downward trend, and the argument will fall apart. KEEP!
C - Ok, so let's apply the avg. applies to all media. It still doesn't help me figure out if TV will remain king, or fall off the grid.
D - This seems like a trick answer choice that's adding another group into the mix, which wasn't part of the initial argument. Also, if we consider people below 18, and they are watching 2 hours of TV, it still doesn't give me any indication till I look at a trend line from the past. So B still seems better. Out.
E - For me, there was no cause and effect in the argument and hence I eliminated it

So B is the answer.
But I would love any insights into option E.


Hi akshayk,

I have one question, the first premise says "TV is the future because it \(remains\) king of all media", does it not mean that the argument has looked back into past trends and say it remains king of all media?

Thanks

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 568

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 06 Jul 2016
Posts: 437

Kudos [?]: 129 [1], given: 98

Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: TV is the future because it remains king of all media [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Nov 2017, 04:21
1
This post received
KUDOS
hellosanthosh2k2 wrote:
akshayk wrote:
gmatexam439 wrote:
TV is the future because it remains king of all media. While handsets get hyped, the typical U.S. consumer watches more than 5 hours of TV a day, according to Nielsen, and even younger adults 18 to 24 years old—the supposed digital generation—spend 3 hours and 30 minutes on televisions daily compared to only 49 minutes on the Web and 20 minutes on mobile.

The above argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

a) The argument fails to look into the possible causes of higher consumption of TV over other media
b) The argument makes an assumption that the consumer preferences will not change significantly over time without looking at the past trends.
c) The argument fails to consider that the average figures may not apply to every consumer of media
d) The argument does not talk about population below 18 years of age, which will soon be part of the so called “digital generation”
e) The argument proposes that the same cause and effect may apply in the future as in the past without even looking at the possibility of existence of cause in the future.

[Reveal] Spoiler: My Understanding
I am confused between B and D. The sample of the population interviewed is also a problem here. I agree "B" is also correct, but "D" is also a valid flaw in the argument. Why can't D be the answer?


Good Question. 2 minutes to solve this question. I was stuck between B & E.

Below is my thought process while answering this question:

Breaking down the argument
TV is king in the future because it is king now (Bold Claim)
Avg. consumer watches X amount to TV, and even the current generation watches more TV than spending time on other forms of media.

Assumption - According to the author, this is happening now, and will likely happen in the future no matter what.

Breaking down the answer choices
A - This is immediately out. Even if we know why consumption is high, it won't help explain if it will remain high or fall.
B - This seems like a good one. Bold claim made without looking at past trends of TV's role in media. If the avg. consumer watched for e.g. 7 hours of TV a day, and now it's at 5 hours a day, and if the younger children watched 5 hours before, and now are only watching 3 hours a day, there is a definitive downward trend, and the argument will fall apart. KEEP!
C - Ok, so let's apply the avg. applies to all media. It still doesn't help me figure out if TV will remain king, or fall off the grid.
D - This seems like a trick answer choice that's adding another group into the mix, which wasn't part of the initial argument. Also, if we consider people below 18, and they are watching 2 hours of TV, it still doesn't give me any indication till I look at a trend line from the past. So B still seems better. Out.
E - For me, there was no cause and effect in the argument and hence I eliminated it

So B is the answer.
But I would love any insights into option E.


Hi akshayk,

I have one question, the first premise says "TV is the future because it \(remains\) king of all media", does it not mean that the argument has looked back into past trends and say it remains king of all media?

Thanks


Hey Buddy,

So here's my take:

Author's perspective
TV was King ---------> TV remains KING ---------> TV is the future of all media

What is the one thing the author would need to assume for this to be true?
The author would need to assume that the consumer preference would remain constant.


Quote:
TV is the future because it remains king of all media

The author might have looked at past trends, or maybe not. We ,simply, do not know.
What we do know is that the author has not shared the trend with us.

For example :
1990 - Consumer watches 11 hours of TV a day ; TV is KING
2017 - Consumer watches 5 hours of TV a day, and the younger adults watch 3+ hours of TV a day, whereas their usage of internet etc. is around 1 hour a day ; TV remains KING

From the above, you can draw a conclusion i.e. TV was KING, and remains KING. But if you look at the trend, the TV consumption is dropping.

Quote:
the typical U.S. consumer watches more than 5 hours of TV a day, according to Nielsen, and even younger adults 18 to 24 years old—the supposed digital generation—spend 3 hours and 30 minutes on televisions daily compared to only 49 minutes on the Web and 20 minutes on mobile.

The author specifically emphasises 'even younger adults' watch more TV than use mobile, etc to convince us that TV remains KING, at this present moment.
BUT
Typical Consumer - 5 hours a day
Younger Adults - 3 hours 30 minutes a day
There is already a 1 hour 30 minute downward trend in TV consumption.


Does this help at all?
_________________

Put in the work, and that dream score is yours!

Kudos [?]: 129 [1], given: 98

Re: TV is the future because it remains king of all media   [#permalink] 23 Nov 2017, 04:21
Display posts from previous: Sort by

TV is the future because it remains king of all media

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.