Passage Summary: The author claims that while TV shows about social issues must show both sides because they are political and debatable, science shows don't have to follow that rule.

Conclusion: Television networks are not obligated to provide equal time for opposing views on scientific issues.

Reasoning: The obligation for equal time applies to social issues because they are politically significant and rarely settled by evidence, implying scientific issues do not share these traits.

Analysis: To weaken this argument, we must attack the distinction the author draws between social and scientific issues. The author assumes that scientific issues are fundamentally different because they lack political implications or can be definitively settled by evidence. Look for an answer choice that blurs this line, perhaps by showing that scientific debates can be just as politically charged or evidentiary inconclusive as social ones. If science can be 'unsettled' or 'political,' the author's justification for the exemption collapses.