[presto8]

The video adds a lot of extra stuff beyond what is in the NY Times video: There is an interview with one of the test takers; a description of three possible correct answers (1, 3, or 4, depending on the perspective); a video demonstration of several ways to compute it; and an interesting discussion about sidereal time.

Not that you were implying otherwise, but in this case I feel the video adds quite a bit more material and a more complete story beyond the NY Times piece. In reading the NY Times piece, I would leave with the conclusion that the correct answer was not one of the options. After watching the video, I would leave with the conclusion that the question was ambiguously written leading to multiple possible answers, one of which was there, but two other valid answers were not there.