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.
The manager of the WWAC radio station, in the memorandum, states that the station should shift to a news and talk format to reverse the decline in listener numbers. He or she has come to this conclusion due to the fact that the format is becoming more popular in their area and will attract more listeners. However, this conclusion is based on several unfounded assumptions.
Firstly, the author assumes that the decline in the number of listeners is due to the fact that the audience does not prefer the rock music format. However, this may not be the case. It may be that the radio station plays one too many ads and that has managed to annoy their listeners enough to stop tuning in to their station. It is also possible that the listeners simply find the radio jockeys' voices intolerable and have thus, decided to boycott the radio station. If either of these statements is true, then the decline in listeners cannot be attributed to the format of the radio station, and changing it would make no difference whatsoever.
Secondly, the author assumes that a decline in local sales of recorded music implies that people are simply not interested in music anymore. The decline in sales could be because of an increase in prices of records, so much that most people cannot afford to buy them. People may have also switched to buying music online or streaming music on the Internet, which provides them access to a much larger variety of music from the comfort of their homes, without having to take the trouble to go to a record store and purchase records. If these statements hold water, then, maybe, changing formats would only lead to a further decline in listener numbers.
Finally, the author assumes that switching to a news and talk format will lead to an increase in the number of listeners. However, maybe, a rival radio station already has a thriving news and talk program that most of the population loves to listen to. These listeners might not consider switching over to WWAC radio station if they already listen to similar programs on another station and enjoy doing so. Even if they do give it a try, there is no guarantee that they will like it and continue to listen to it regularly. If this happens, then the shift to the new format would, again, not be beneficial.
In conclusion, the author's decision to switch to a different format in an attempt to reach a wider audience is based on certain assumptions, which, if proven false, would make the switch useless. To make an informed decision, the author needs to properly consider several factors: whether people have actually stopped listening because they do not like the music or whether it is something else about the radio station that irks them, whether do they know that their audience will actually tune in if they switch formats, and whether they know their audience well enough to determine what they like or are they just making an assumption based on general trends. Unless these questions are properly examined, and proper evidence is provided to substantiate the assumptions, a decision cannot be made.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 533 350
No. of Characters: 2497 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.805 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.685 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.354 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 185 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 136 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.65 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.361 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.85 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.54 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.133 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, thus, well, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 50.0 28.8173652695 174% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2566.0 2260.96107784 113% => OK
No of words: 533.0 441.139720559 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.81425891182 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80487177365 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44922818688 2.78398813304 88% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.435272045028 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 797.4 705.55239521 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 84.9379037886 57.8364921388 147% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.3 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.65 23.324526521 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.85 5.70786347227 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.259133646316 0.218282227539 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0854072076267 0.0743258471296 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0797649598458 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156523462694 0.128457276422 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0689930980782 0.0628817314937 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.