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.”
The author claims that scheduling the TV shows back to local and weather news instead of national news will help in revenue retention for local business and increase customer volume. To support this conclusion, he cites various evidences regarding the issue. Although the evidences appear to bolster the author’s contention to switch TV shows back to former level, a meticulous analysis will show otherwise. So the author needs to cite the following specific evidences to make the argument more sound:1) reason for local business for withdrawing their advertising contract. 2) whether there are other TV station in local attracting their customer. 3) volume of local and weather news for the place on a day-to-day basis.
First, the author assumes that local businesses are canceling their advertising because of late night national news coverage. It may be possible that the local businesses they were working with are not doing good and closing down. Perhaps they are trying to cut down their expenses from advertising. If any of the above reason is true for local businesses then the author’s conclusion is considered flawed.
Second, information regarding competitive TV station should also be analyzed. To attract more customers, TV station perhaps should understand what their competitions are broadcasting and then create a concrete plan to attract those customers. If competitors are also focused on national news and are able to increase customers, then the author’s argument does not hold water.
Last but not least, volume of local and weather news available for the place should be analyzed before switching back to former. If weather and local news volume is considerably less and could not cover the TV time then customer might be again switching to another TV broadcast. Depending on availability of the news, author’s assertation could be bolstered or enervated.
In sum, the author needs to provide more information about customer preferences rather than blatantly switching back to former format. Valid and direct information from customer as well as local businesses should be presented in the argument to strengthen it. Without these information, the author cannot convenience me on the claim.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 350 350
No. of Characters: 1828 1500
No. of Different Words: 177 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.325 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.223 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.732 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 107 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.421 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.888 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.579 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.333 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.075 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 268, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this information' or 'these informations'?
Suggestion: this information; these informations
... the argument to strengthen it. Without these information, the author cannot convenience me on th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, regarding, second, so, then, well, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 13.6137724551 22% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1876.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 349.0 441.139720559 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.37535816619 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8177948208 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 204.123752495 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.521489971347 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 570.6 705.55239521 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.6522912668 57.8364921388 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.7368421053 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3684210526 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.78947368421 5.70786347227 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.228165843767 0.218282227539 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0748053467064 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0679161574308 0.0701772020484 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12405137912 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0590061595191 0.0628817314937 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.