This question reminds me a bit of a couple of questions that have shown up in the past about automobile accidents. The questions that I have in mind revolve around the idea that the chance that you’ll be injured in an auto accident involves two factors – the likelihood of the accident occurring, and the likelihood that you’ll be injured IF an accident does occur. So for instance, if you drive a Hummer, and let’s say that Hummers have a high probability of being in accidents, you still might have a low probability of being injured in a car accident.
Similarly, the amount of time one spends reading can be thought of as a function of two factors – 1) How much leisure time do you have? 2) How many different options do you have for spending that leisure time?
The passage focuses exclusively on question 2, and question 2 weighs in favor of the passage’s conclusion, but it ignores question 1. The right answer addresses question 1 in such as way as to counteract the passage’s information – not by contradicting a premise, which is a no-no, but by adding other relevant information that undercuts it.