Q12 - The television show Henry was not widely accepted

[gmatalongthewatchtower]

I chose D for this.

I think that there are two ways to interpret D)

D - If "Henry" was moved at the same time slot as the second best show, then there is a good probability that a greater number of people would watch it. (People are ready to sit and watch TV at that time) => strengthener because greater number of people watched the show, and it was not able to hold their attention. Hence, the show is really bad! ...helps author's conclusion.

Another way to interpret this would be : If "Henry" was moved to Wed and aired at the same time as the second best show, a greater people would compare "Henry" with the second best show. Hence, the fact that far fewer people watched it on Wed, proves that it was disliked by people => strengthener and hence, tue's success was definitely due to piggbacking with "that's life".


Either way, this choice seems strengthener to me.

Help please....

Thanks

[timmydoeslsat]

This is a causal argument.

The argument concludes that the really popular "That's Life" show is what caused "Henry" to be widely watched before it moved to Wednesday showings.

Our evidence is, of course, a correlation.

Henry was not widely watched before being moved right after "That's Life."

After it was placed following "That's Life," its viewership soared.

"Henry" has been moved again, this time to Wednesday, and it does not follow "That's Life" anymore.

What would help strengthen the argument that it was indeed "That's Life" that caused the viewership to increase? Show me that the next show that took over for Henry had its viewership increase a great deal as well. Or show me that when other TV shows moved away from its spot after "That's Life," it too fell in viewership.

Answer choices:

A) Has nothing to do with viewership
B) Weakens.
C) Shows the presumed cause with the presumed effect.
D) So what? Henry airs at the same time as a really popular show? We want to know whether the "That's Life" show caused the viewership Henry had when it followed the show.
E) This absolutely does nothing for us, who cares about what that show did in its first year.

[gmatalongthewatchtower]

D) So what? Henry airs at the same time as a really popular show? We want to know whether the "That's Life" show caused the viewership Henry had when it followed the show.

I believe the conclusion is not just that "that's life" caused an increase in viewership of "Henry" but that it caused an increased in viewership of "Henry" AND that the increase was not because the people liked it.

Don't you think that D) strengthens the underlined portion above?

Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks

[timmydoeslsat]

D) So what? Henry airs at the same time as a really popular show? We want to know whether the "That's Life" show caused the viewership Henry had when it followed the show.

I believe the conclusion is not just that "that's life" caused an increase in viewership of "Henry" but that it caused an increased in viewership of "Henry" AND that the increase was not because the people liked it.

Don't you think that D) strengthens the underlined portion above?

Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks

The conclusion is one of causation. It really is superflous for the conclusion to say "...and not due to people liking it." I am trying to strengthen the idea that "That's Life" was the cause for the wide viewership.

Answer choice D tells us that Henry airs at the same time as the second most popular show. This doesn't tell me what was going on during the old Tuesday evening lineup in which Henry was aired after "That's Life." People can still like this show, but they like the second most watched program more.

Think about it this way. If you wanted to prove to me that the scheduling order is what caused a show to increase its viewership, would it not strengthen your argument for the very next show aired after the program in question to have its viewership go way up? Of course it would, it is something one would expect if the program were the causal factor.

Stick close to cause and effect and stay away from assumptions regarding less people watching and disliking the program. Answer choice D shows us Henry being aired at the same time as the second most popular program. A lack of viewership during this time would be expected and would not have to be due to a dislike.

Go about strengthening this argument that "That's Life" is the causal factor.

[rpcuhk]

I think (D) is a weakner. It provides an alternative explanation to why Henry's viewership declined. It's not because it no longer followed That's Life, and people disliked it. It is because its time slot clashes with that of the second most popular show.