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 is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of this memorandum has optimistically assumed that they should increase the time they devote to weather and local news so as to attract more viewers and not lose any more advertising revenues. In support of this he has stated that in the past there have been various complaints pertaining to the coverage of local and weather news and many local businesses who used to advertise with them have canceled their contracts. The argument put forth by the author seems plausible at first, however on a deeper analysis reveals some obvious fallacies.
A major lacuna in the argument is that the author states that the author has assumed that the various complaints that are pertaining to the local and weather news have all been about increasing the coverage. It maybe likely that the viewers maybe asking the channel to reduce the coverage of these topics even further. Thus more evidence needs to be provided about the nature of the complaints and if all them were related to requesting the channel to hike up the time devoted to the related news. If they were not, then the increasing the local and weather news time is not a feasible option.
Furthermore, it has been assumed by the writer of this piece that there have been several complaints from viewers over the past years. But there is no mention about the number of viewers who have had complaints. It maybe possible that a few viewers may have been repeatedly lodging complaints about the same problems, whereas several others are satisfied. Thus making the changes over the complaints of a few people will make majority of the viewers dissatisfied. Thus the author must provide more proof about the number of people who have complained rather than simply stating the number of complaints.
Finally, in the argument, the writer prematurely assumes that the reason that local advertisers have bailed upon the late-night news program show, is that the weather and news time is insufficient. It maybe likely that the channel charges a high amount for them to advertise during their show. Thus till the time more details are provided about the exact reason of the reduction in the number of advertisers, the assumption cannot be made.
Thus, the author has made an argument based on several wishy- washy assumptions. He must bolster these with evidence regarding the nature of complaints received, number of viewers who have complained and the exact reason why many local advertisers have dropped contracts with them. Till he doesn't do that, the argument does not hold water.
Comments
e-rater score 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: 18 15
No. of Words: 428 350
No. of Characters: 2076 1500
No. of Different Words: 185 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.548 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.85 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.446 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 106 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 61 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.778 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.1 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.722 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.367 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.586 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.149 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...e they devote to weather and local news so as to attract more viewers and not lose any m...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 320, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... coverage of these topics even further. Thus more evidence needs to be provided abou...
^^^^
Line 5, column 465, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...e majority of the viewers dissatisfied. Thus the author must provide more proof abou...
^^^^
Line 7, column 295, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...or them to advertise during their show. Thus till the time more details are provided...
^^^^
Line 9, column 291, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ve dropped contracts with them. Till he doesnt do that, the argument does not hold wat...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, regarding, so, then, thus, whereas, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2122.0 2260.96107784 94% => OK
No of words: 427.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96955503513 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52065493003 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.44262295082 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 661.5 705.55239521 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.0719543985 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.888888889 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7222222222 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.16666666667 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.233263712797 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0797351551797 0.0743258471296 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0972238368183 0.0701772020484 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147653732499 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.094962670044 0.0628817314937 151% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 98.500998004 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.