'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.”
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence would be needed in order to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
In the memorandum from the business manager of a television, it is stated that the manager recommends to abate national news screen time and reinstate the screen time of local and weather news. The manager makes this assumption based on the withdrawal of advertising contracts from local businesses and complaints of the viewers. However, before this recommendation can be properly evaluated, three questions must be answered.
First of all, the business manager makes the assumption that viewers complaints about the reduced screen time of local and weather news have a direct co-relation to them not wanting to watch more national news. This is an unwarranted assumption as, the demand for local news and weather news might be because of an upcoming calamity which was forecasted before. If there was a chance or a mention of a hailstorm then the locals would obviously tend to seek more information regarding public safety, condition of the transportation and roads. Thus, the complaints of local viewers asking for more screen time of local and weather news should not be construed as a disliking towards national news.
Secondly, it is also assumed in the prompt that local business cancelling their advertising contracts with the station is because of the increased time to national news. However, the withdrawal of advertising contracts does not directly commensurate with the increase in national news time. The factors might be underlying in the price of the television station or even a better offer from rival stations. Therefore, the rife assumption, leading towards a faulty proposition might harm the television station rather than benefit it.
Finally, the manager assumes that the increase or reinstatement of screen time for local and weather news will attract more viewers and it will prevent them from losing further advertisement revenues. To be honest, the viewers might not even be interested in news at all. News, as the world itself has also been digitized for quite some time now. Viewers can watch live news or read about what the want whenever they want from their smartphones or computer devices. So, they might be craving something eclectic from the television stations rather than just banal news. For example, a study in 2018, concludes that viewers enjoy a comedic routine more than a serious news regarding international affairs.
The assumptions made in the prompt are unwarranted and as it stands from the arguments made above, severely flawed. Thus, the proper evaluation of the proposed statement from the business manager require more evidence such as, information regarding the viewers' specific choice of programs and an analysis of the local business advertisement contracts withdrawal issue. This will eventually help in evaluating the amount of time period allocated towards different programs are beneficial from a business point of view or if a complete restructuring of programs is needed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 92, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'recommends abating'.
Suggestion: recommends abating
...levision, it is stated that the manager recommends to abate national news screen time and reinstate...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, as for, for example, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2488.0 2260.96107784 110% => OK
No of words: 467.0 441.139720559 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32762312634 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64867537961 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.828944222 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.460385438972 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 761.4 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.2583061482 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.4 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.35 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.65 5.70786347227 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.410909753171 0.218282227539 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.141831538873 0.0743258471296 191% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102385698446 0.0701772020484 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258271181919 0.128457276422 201% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0535026156336 0.0628817314937 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => 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.