Most people feel that they are being confused by the information from broadcast news.
Conclusion (So)
The information in typical broadcast news stories is poorly organized.
Evidence
People are confused by the info in broadcast news, which could be because it's delivered too quickly or because its poorly organized.
The information in typical broadcast news stories is of far lower information density than the max most people can cope with.
Evaluate
(Even though assumption question stems with "conclusion properly drawn / conclusion follows logically" are 99% Sufficient Assumption, this is Necessary Assumption because it asks what assumption is required.)
The basic architecture of this argument is one that proceeds by Ruling Out Options.
P: The confusion is from X or Y. P: It's not from X. C: so Y is happening.
One quick problem we have with that first Either / Or is that it doesn't clearly state that there are only two options. (This is the hallmark of a False Choice flaw.)
Let's pretend for a second that there are just those two. Did the author successfully rule out the possibility that "the information is delivered too quickly"?
Sort of. She's assuming that
That feels like a pretty reasonable common sense link. You'd presumably interpret "delivered too quickly" as "whoa, I can't process that fast" and the information density metric seems to be exactly about what we can process.
To fight this author, we'd either have to argue that something could be way less than our max information density but still be delivered too quickly, or we'd have to argue for a third option.
The author never said we HAD to choose between too quick or poorly organized. So if we can't explain people's news confusion with "delivered too quickly", then we need an Alternate Explanation for why people feel confused, or else the author gets his "poorly organized" wish.
Goal
Look for an answer supplying the missing link,
or for an answer ruling out an alternate explanation for why people feel confused by the info on the news.