CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >  Read the passage given below and answer the f... Start Learning for Free
Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.
Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.
Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information — and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings — that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.
There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”
Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?
Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice — of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative — has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.
That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people — that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.
Q. What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?
  • a)
    To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.
  • b)
    To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.
  • c)
    To highlight the fact that media's narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.
  • d)
    To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here i...
In the paragraph, the author first mentions how media now has the ability to set the narrative. Then she goes on to show that the current information dissemination structure has vulnerabilities that can be exploited by people so that they can hijack the narrative. Hence, through the paragraph, the author highlights how people can exploit the vulnerabilities in media's information dissemination mechanism to set the narrative. Thus, option C is the right answer.
Option A is incorrect because previous dissemination structures have not been mentioned in the passage.
Option B is incorrect as the author does not say that the media should not be allowed to set the national narrative.
Option D is incorrect as the author provides no illustration of manipulation. 
Hence, option C.
Free Test
Community Answer
Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here i...
Understanding the Penultimate Paragraph's Purpose
The penultimate paragraph serves to emphasize a critical aspect of media's role in the phenomenon of terrorism. The core message highlights how easily the media narrative can be manipulated, particularly by extremist groups.
Key Points from the Paragraph:
- Vulnerability of Media Structures: The paragraph addresses the inherent vulnerabilities in modern media dissemination systems. It points out that these systems lack explicit controls, making them susceptible to exploitation.
- Hijacking of the Narrative: It stresses that extremist groups, such as jihadists, can easily take advantage of this vulnerability to create fear and hysteria among the population. By manipulating media coverage, they can amplify their impact significantly.
- Creation of Fear: The text outlines that while terrorist groups are responsible for violent acts, it is the media's amplification of these acts that perpetuates a continuous state of fear. This suggests that the media's role is not just passive reporting but an active instigator of public sentiment.
Conclusion
In essence, option 'C' is the correct answer as it directly captures the essence of the paragraph: the ability of media narratives to be hijacked is a crucial component in understanding how terrorism is sustained in society. This manipulation by jihadist groups underscores the significant responsibility media holds in shaping public perception and fear.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.Which of the following would contradict the author’s main argument?

Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.Which of the following cannot be inferred from the passage?

Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.Why does the author cite the example of ‘Jihadi John’?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question based on it.Classicism is a broad river that has run through Western architecture for two-and-a-half millennia. A generation ago it seemed that the stream had reduced to a trickle. And yet now, if not quite in full spate, the river has recaptured a degree of vigour. What has happened, and what does the future hold?Since this represents a revival, a word should be said on this subject at the outset. Revivals are a constant - indeed inevitable - theme of classical architecture, to the point of being almost a defining feature. Even Greek architecture, later regarded as the fons et origo of the classical system, evolved out of - and harked back to - an ancient tradition, now lost.Every subsequent phase of classicism after the Greek period was to some extent a revival, invoking the associations of a golden age. The Romans borrowed the architectural clothes of Greece. This attitude can even be detected in the Middle Ages. To our eyes, a twelfth-century cathedral looks radically different from a Roman basilica. But the monk in the choir stall may hardly have noticed the structural distinction created by the use of pointed arches and rib vaults. Just as painters showed ancient heroes and emperors dressed in the fashions of their own day and place, so, it would seem, the architectural world had no sense of anachronism or stylistic development.Since the Renaissance, a more scholarly approach has prevailed. Architects have been specific about the periods they were reviving. It ended with a grand battle of the styles between Renaissance-inspired classicists and morally convinced Gothicists in the nineteenth century. After that, the age of innocence was well and truly over. Recently the war against classicism has been waged by modernists rather than Gothic revivalists.A favorite criticism made by modernist architects is that the work of the modern classicists is pastiche. They mean not that it is a hodgepodge of different styles, or an exact quotation (both of which are definitions of pastich e), but that it is derivative and revivalist. But of course their architects - respectively John Simpson and Robert A. M. Stern - are reviving certain forms that have fallen out of common usage; thats what classicists do. Indeed, it is the essence of classicism. But they are applying these forms to new purposes, and in so doing producing buildings that look quite different from those of Ancient Rome, Renaissance Florence, or the Beaux-Arts cities of the Gilded Age. This has also always happened. The Romans invented the triumphal arch; it took the Renaissance to invent the balustrade.Classicism is now undergoing one of its periodic revivals. There are also, as I have hinted above, many classicisms to revive. The classical river was not always as pure as previous generations believed. One of the distinctive features of the revival now taking place is the weirdness of some of the precedents being quoted.Q. "Just as painters showed ancient heroes and emperors dressed in the fashions of their own day and place, so, it would seem, the architectural world had no sense of anachronism or stylistic development." The author uses the example of "painters" in this line for which of the following purposes?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question based on it.Classicism is a broad river that has run through Western architecture for two-and-a-half millennia. A generation ago it seemed that the stream had reduced to a trickle. And yet now, if not quite in full spate, the river has recaptured a degree of vigour. What has happened, and what does the future hold?Since this represents a revival, a word should be said on this subject at the outset. Revivals are a constant - indeed inevitable - theme of classical architecture, to the point of being almost a defining feature. Even Greek architecture, later regarded as the fons et origo of the classical system, evolved out of - and harked back to - an ancient tradition, now lost.Every subsequent phase of classicism after the Greek period was to some extent a revival, invoking the associations of a golden age. The Romans borrowed the architectural clothes of Greece. This attitude can even be detected in the Middle Ages. To our eyes, a twelfth-century cathedral looks radically different from a Roman basilica. But the monk in the choir stall may hardly have noticed the structural distinction created by the use of pointed arches and rib vaults. Just as painters showed ancient heroes and emperors dressed in the fashions of their own day and place, so, it would seem, the architectural world had no sense of anachronism or stylistic development.Since the Renaissance, a more scholarly approach has prevailed. Architects have been specific about the periods they were reviving. It ended with a grand battle of the styles between Renaissance-inspired classicists and morally convinced Gothicists in the nineteenth century. After that, the age of innocence was well and truly over. Recently the war against classicism has been waged by modernists rather than Gothic revivalists.A favorite criticism made by modernist architects is that the work of the modern classicists is pastiche. They mean not that it is a hodgepodge of different styles, or an exact quotation (both of which are definitions of pastich e), but that it is derivative and revivalist. But of course their architects - respectively John Simpson and Robert A. M. Stern - are reviving certain forms that have fallen out of common usage; thats what classicists do. Indeed, it is the essence of classicism. But they are applying these forms to new purposes, and in so doing producing buildings that look quite different from those of Ancient Rome, Renaissance Florence, or the Beaux-Arts cities of the Gilded Age. This has also always happened. The Romans invented the triumphal arch; it took the Renaissance to invent the balustrade.Classicism is now undergoing one of its periodic revivals. There are also, as I have hinted above, many classicisms to revive. The classical river was not always as pure as previous generations believed. One of the distinctive features of the revival now taking place is the weirdness of some of the precedents being quoted.Q. None of the following statements can be inferred from the passageEXCEPTthat

Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2025 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Read the passage given below and answer the following questions.Here is an undeniable but seldom-stated fact: The quickest way to destroy terrorism as a tool would be to institute a news media policy of information blackout regarding terrorist attacks. The terrorist act itself only creates a few corpses (9/11 notwithstanding). But it is actually the dissemination of information which creates the state of terror among the population.Of course, in the age of social media we could never implement such a policy. But it’s worth noting that our collective addiction to information—and the inability of for-profit media to pull itself away from ratings—that creates among the collective brain of our population, a deep susceptibility to be terrorized.There is actually one way in which we already, tacitly recognize the role of media in creating and aiding terror. In the wake of mass shootings, assassination attempts, and other kinds of “high profile” acts, the media itself is sensitive to the role it plays in potentially spurring on “copycat” attacks. I’ve seen this kind of thing discussed since Columbine, and perhaps even before. Yet I’ve never seen anyone pull on the thread and unravel it all the way down to its core, to ask: “What if our media itself is the medium which makes mass terrorism possible?”Media coverage is the oxygen that sustains this fire. Media does the terrorizing, more than any particular act. When Jihadi John slits a throat in a country on the other side of the world, how is his knife, and how is that throat, any different than the thousands of people around the world who are murdered by knives and bullets on a daily basis?Our modern information dissemination structures themselves amplify this act and weave it into the fabric of our national story. We have come to rely on this legacy mechanism of “journalism” and “news reporting” for sense-making about the world. We’ve tacitly ceded control of narrative creation about our tribe from the priests over to a for-profit complex of radio, print, TV, web, etc. And this entire edifice—of top-down, broadcast synchrony of a singular, dominant narrative—has a particular failure mode. Since it has no explicit control (it is an emergent hive of activity), and since it has no actual architecture that would prevent it from catastrophic, systemic failure, it can get hijacked. Very easily.That vulnerability, when exploited by jihadist groups, creates a standing wave pattern, namely, the fear of random acts of violence. But terrorism, by definition, is the creation of a state of fear or hysteria among a population. ISIL doesn’t operate any radio towers in the US, nor does it configure internet routers in our data centers. Jihadists kill people—that is true. But our media environment creates and sustains the sense of terror.Q.What is the purpose of the penultimate paragraph?a)To explain how modern dissemination structures are different from the ones that existed earlier.b)To argue against allowing media to set the national narrative.c)To highlight the fact that medias narrative setting ability can easily be hijacked.d)To illustrate how easy it is to manipulate the media.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam
Signup to solve all Doubts
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev