According to the author, rage bait works when

Question

Option 1: reading responsible accounts of pollution, terror or elections provides social media users food for thought.

Option 2: social media content fuels public anger to bring about constructive social change.

Option 3: tech platforms deliberately supply distorted content that incentivises hate.

Option 4: users actively chase news content that conforms to their political biases.

AfterBoards · Accepted Answer

From passage: "The algorithms got tweaked to feed us more and more of the same, activating a diabolical incentive structure of hate."

Thought Process Breakdown: The question asks when rage bait works. -> Rage bait means content designed to create anger. -> Platforms saw that angry content increases engagement. -> So algorithms started feeding more such content. -> This creates hate and distorted reality. Option 1 is responsible reporting, not rage bait. Option 2 makes rage bait sound constructive, which is wrong. Option 4 shifts blame to users, but the passage focuses on platforms. Option 3 matches the mechanism.

Option Analysis: 🔴 Option 1 -> Opposite Context -> Responsible reports give food for thought, not rage. 🟠 Option 2 -> Positive Distortion -> Rage bait is called poisonous, not constructive. 🟢 Option 3 -> Correct -> Platforms feed distorted content that incentivises hate. 🟠 Option 4 -> Plausible but Unstated -> Political bias is not the main mechanism given.

IPMAT Indore (VA) PYQs

Keyboard Shortcuts