“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
The author claims that since the corporate funding is experiencing severe cuts the attendance at his/her arts museum will start to decrease. The author also suggests that such a situation could be avoided if some of the city's fund foe supporting arts are reallocated to public television. Stated in this way the argument fails to consider several key factors rather arriving at a conclusion hastily. The data does not seem to support the conclusion the authors argument is weak and unconvincing.
Firstly the author readily assumes that the public television programs are the only source for the people to know about arts in the museums. Recently google has started a new project called virtual tour on museums which helps you to take a virtual tour of the museum an explore it. This has created a wide spread interest in the people and has driven them to visit the arts museum most of them visiting atleast for the sake of comparing the virual tour with the real one. With the recent advancement in technology the information about art museums can be collected via mobile applications as well. So the severve cuts in the television programs should be a contributing factor for the reduction in the attendance.
Secondly the increase in the viewership of the television programs on art museums has been directly compared to the increase in the attendance...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document