17. The following appeared in a memorandum from the manager of WWAC radio station.
To reverse a decline in listener numbers, our owners have decided that WWAC must change from its current rock-music format. The decline has occurred despite population growth in our listening area, but that growth has resulted mainly from people moving here after their retirement. We must make listeners of these new residents. We could switch to a music format tailored to their tastes, but a continuing decline in local sales of recorded music suggests limited interest in music. Instead we should change to a news and talk format, a form of radio that is increasingly popular in our area.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
As the listeners of WWAC radio has decreased recently, the managers decided to change their broadcasting music from rock to more suitable genres to older people migrating to this area after retirement. Moreover, as a result of a descending trend of music’s sell numbers, the owners are considering to switch their work from music to news and talk show radio. Even though the reasoning may seem cogent in general, the writer is skeptical of the argument These decisions are made based on some unclear statistics. The more shreds of evidence gathered, the more decision-making process effective. In the following paragraphs, some of these missed pieces will be mentioned.
To begin, a precise inquiry about demographic trends in the area could be helpful. If the data demonstrate that the number of old people in increasing more than usual, the decisions about radio can be justified. On the other hand, if population proportions based on age hasn’t changed significantly, other reasons should be assessed to analyze the situation. Additionally, a thorough research about music preferences among different age groups can help the owners to tailor their programs more accurately. If the majority of people love a specific kind of music, the radio can play this type at the most of times rather than eliminating other genres altogether. So, additional demographic and musical taste information can be beneficial in this argument.
Furthermore, the trends of listeners in similar radio stations in the region are a big conducive tool. If other radios confront the same plummeting number of listeners, a change in the type of playing songs or programs are not a permanent solution. Conversely, if this downward experience is exclusive for WWCA, the managers should consider the suggested options more seriously. Moreover, the status of other news and talk show radios are another important factor in the line of reasoning. Do these stations have enough listeners? Are they experiencing a negative reaction from their followers? Answering these question can challenge or support the proposed choices based on their directions.
Another vague aspect of the argument is about declining trend of selling music. Although this trend might be true, it can’t be used in justification of changing station agenda. While a change in musical taste can be the reason of buying less music from stores, there are other reasons. Online stores, for example, are a convenient way of purchasing music nowadays. Online radio stations are a powerful rival of traditional ones either. Considering these factors can strengthen the rationality of the argument or vice versa.
To sum up, additional demographic information along with the favorite genre of music in each age groups can improve the image of the facing problem. Data about similar musical radios and even news and talk show radios can be informative as well. Based on the current pieces of evidence, the writer stays very dubious about the argument at best.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not exactly. Need to argue against the conclusion always. For this topic it is:
Instead we should change to a news and talk format, a form of radio that is increasingly popular in our area.
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 481 350
No. of Characters: 2456 1500
No. of Different Words: 254 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.683 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.106 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.735 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 184 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 135 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 103 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 66 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.815 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.4 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.519 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.259 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.452 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.036 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 379, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'thorough research'.
Suggestion: thorough research
...to analyze the situation. Additionally, a thorough research about music preferences among different...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 605, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the times') or simply say ''most times''.
Suggestion: most of the times; most times
...ic, the radio can play this type at the most of times rather than eliminating other genres al...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, furthermore, if, may, moreover, so, then, well, while, for example, in general, kind of, as a result, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 13.6137724551 7% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2540.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 480.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29166666667 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68069463864 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86901248497 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 204.123752495 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51875 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 808.2 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 2.70958083832 369% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.5432640974 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.0740740741 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7777777778 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.25925925926 5.70786347227 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.190105327349 0.218282227539 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.052958603748 0.0743258471296 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0533368586257 0.0701772020484 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112429676045 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.049538528494 0.0628817314937 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 144.0 98.500998004 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.