The following appeared in a memorandum from the manager of WWAC radio station.
"WWAC must change from its current rock-music format because the number of listeners has been declining, even though the population in our listening area has been growing. The population growth has resulted mainly from people moving to our area after their retirement, and we must make listeners of these new residents. But they seem to have limited interest in music: several local stores selling recorded music have recently closed. Therefore, just changing to another kind of music is not going to increase our audience. Instead, we should adopt a news-and-talk format, a form of radio that is increasingly popular in our area."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The first question that we should ask to fully evaluate the recommondation in the memo is the reason for the close of local recorded music stores. The manager simply assumes that the bust is due to that the coming population have limited interest in music, which, however, could be unwarranted. It is possible that the macro economic situation is bad currently, making the business difficult to operate; or the recorded music may be obsolete and eliminated by new music forms such as online music and multiple player. IN both scenarios, people may still feel interested in the rock music in the radio program. Only when we have an overall understanding of the close of those recorded music stores, can we establish a more convincing causal relationship between those phenomena and the taste of population.
Granted that the growing population have limited interest in music, the question why WWAC has lost its audience should be discussed more carefully. It might not be the primary reason for people to discontinue to listen to the WWAC that the content is not appealing. There are myriads of alternative explanations. For instance, the old charimatic anchor of the music program may just retire; the new anchor may fail to appeal so many audiences. In addition, the status of radio as a media may have been challenged by televisions and internet, which draw attentions of many former audiences. Without answering to the question above and rule out all these seemingly tenable explanations, the recommendation to adopt a new format of program would be largely attenuated.
Finally, even if the music program has indeed lost its popularity in the area, we should ask for an overall evaluation of a new plan. However, the manager fails to support his new suggestion properly. He/She merely indicate that a news-and-talk format would succeed on account of its increasingly popularity. However, it is universally acknowledged that the fashion could be whimsical, today's novelty may well be abandoned in tomorrow's landfill. The manager has to provide more information to support the promising of the new form to make his recommendation valid.
Moreover, questions on historical background about the WWAC and the current market situation should be considered to make a better judgment. The radio station may be renowned in music radio program and take a dominant position in that field, whereas the news-and-talk format has been adopted by many competitors and the alteration from the old form to the new form might be painstaking on account of fierce competition.
To sum up, the decision to change the form of a radio station is momentous since it may have a derect influence on the future development of the station, thus should be taken seriously. The questions above are all important things and contraints that WWAC should take into account. After that, we could fully decide whether the recommendation could work or not.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 216, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[3]
Message: The pronoun 'She' must be used with a third-person verb: 'indicates'.
Suggestion: indicates
... new suggestion properly. He/She merely indicate that a news-and-talk format would succe...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, thus, well, whereas, as to, for instance, in addition, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 12.9520958084 178% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2458.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 479.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13152400835 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67825486995 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91234950334 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494780793319 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 776.7 705.55239521 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.0274652742 57.8364921388 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.047619048 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8095238095 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.09523809524 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.174876096249 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0504101939341 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0378301062497 0.0701772020484 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101033849395 0.128457276422 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0309048147709 0.0628817314937 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.