The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station:
‘’Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station’s coverage of weather and local news. In addition, local businesses that used to advertise during our late-night news program have just canceled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to the program and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should restore the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level.
In this memo, the author contends that a specific television station in order to attract more viewers and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, will devote more time to weather and local news in its late-night program, as it previously happened. He or she provides the following as evidence to support his or her claims; firstly, the fact that there were some complaints about the station's coverage of weather and local news, secondly, the concept that some local businesses have canceled their advertising contracts during the late-night program. The reasoning of the argument is totally flawed, as it is based upon unsubstantiated assumptions.
First, the author fails to ensure us about the nature and role of these comlaints, that received from viewers and were directed to the coverage of weather and local news. Probably, the aforementioned complaints were a small quantity, or they cound even be outnumbered by some positive reviews that the station has received. The author needs to provide compelling evidence about all these facts, such as the number of complaints and how it has grown during the last years, in order for us to accept the validity of his or her claims. In addition, the fact that the local businesses have canceled their advertising contracts, does not necessarily result form the fact that the station has used more time for national news during the late-night program. Perhaps, the businesses wanted to spend their funds somewhere else, or even they wanted to focus on other forms of marketing, such as radio advertising. Much more specific information and accurate data should be provided, in order for the readers to be convinced by this evidence.
Furthermore, the author wrongly assumes that if more time will be devoted to weather and local news, the station will attract more viewers and avoid losing any further advertising revenues. The readers are given no indication of the effectiveness of the specific practices, thus it is equivocal that they are about to yield any positive results. The spokesperson should have quoted specific methods and alternatives that would lead to these two positive outcomes. For example, surveys that display the viewers' behavior and also detailed information that local business will spend more money on advertising. Otherwise, it suggests more a positive correlation, rather than a casual connection.
In conclusion, it is too hastily stated that the late-night program should be restored to its former levels. The audience is given no information about the previous situation of the specific program. The arguer should have provided more information about the previous circumstances and most important, about the station's profitability. That would convince us about any positive or prolific situation of the station's previous model of news program.
The argument is weak since neither is the conclusion sound, nor is the suggestion legitimate. Had there been substantial evidence, perhaps, the argument would have sounded more credible, but in its absence, it sounds indefensible.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 485 350
No. of Characters: 2526 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.693 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.208 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.749 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 187 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 155 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 111 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.622 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.323 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.538 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.11 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 394, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'stations'' or 'station's'?
Suggestion: stations'; station's
...at there were some complaints about the stations coverage of weather and local news, sec...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 653, Rule ID: FROM_FORM[4]
Message: Did you mean 'from'?
Suggestion: from
... contracts, does not necessarily result form the fact that the station has used more...
^^^^
Line 9, column 503, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'viewers'' or 'viewer's'?
Suggestion: viewers'; viewer's
.... For example, surveys that display the viewers behavior and also detailed information ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 631, Rule ID: MORE_A_JJ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'a more positive'?
Suggestion: a more positive
... on advertising. Otherwise, it suggests more a positive correlation, rather than a casual conne...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 313, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'stations'' or 'station's'?
Suggestion: stations'; station's
...umstances and most important, about the stations profitability. That would convince us a...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, second, secondly, so, thus, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 11.1786427146 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2603.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 485.0 441.139720559 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36701030928 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85671126206 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.461855670103 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 809.1 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 17.0 8.76447105788 194% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.2916290402 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.15 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.25 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.70786347227 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234147263959 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0679710971657 0.0743258471296 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0856207393261 0.0701772020484 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133810696378 0.128457276422 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0957859377221 0.0628817314937 152% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 98.500998004 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => 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
---------------------
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.