Read the paragraph from the Newsela article "PRO/CON: Binge-Watching?" and note the boldface evidence to support the main argume
nt. "John Mayer is a psychologist. He says, "We are all bombarded with stress from everyday living, and with the nature of today's world where information floods us constantly. It is hard to shut our minds down and tune out the stress and pressures." Binge-watching acts "like a steel door," he says. It blocks our brains from thinking about those constant stressors that force themselves into our thoughts."
The main argument is that binge-watching helps to reduce stress.
Which answer best uses the evidence to evaluate the main argument?
Question 8 options:
The argument is effective because the evidence from an expert illustrates how binge-watching relieves stress.
The argument is ineffective because the evidence fails to explain how binge-watching harms the brain.
I believe the correct answer is the second option - The argument is ineffective because the evidence fails to explain how binge-watching harms the brain.
This can be assumed as the title of the article reads "PRO/CON: Binge-Watching?" although in the article, there are no cons of binge watching explained, it just explains what the brain does when one binge watches and how this relieves stress.
