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 waether 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 writer attempts to evaluation and rectify the problem of reduced views and advert contracts by proposing to return to the old format of a news station. However, due to the lack of evidence and vague claims, the argument fails to convince.
First and foremost, there is obvious doubt surrounding the premise that the television station received complaints from the viewers about its coverage of weather and local news. The writer does not state exactly what the complaints were about. Details on possible aspects that the viewers did not seem to like may range from reduced time, changed formats or the subject of discussions. Therefore, it seems naïve to assume that reverting back to the former time slots may prevent further criticism.
The writer also uses the increased termination of advertising contracts from local businesses as evidence of the failing new broadcasting format. However, this causal argument fails to discuss any other possible variables that might have led to ending their contract. Did they find better advertising opportunities at another television station? Was it the decreased screen time for weather and local news that proved unprofitable or were there other issues?
Lastly, the writer advocates that reverting back to the old format may attract 'more views'. This argument seems baseless. We are not given any premise about why the old format would garner more views, let alone cut the rate of contract cancellation by local businesses. To corroborate such a claim, a survey of both their viewers and their advertising businesses might prove helpful.
In conclusion, the lack of evidence and reasoning weakens the writer's argument. Details such as surveys and thorough analysis of other possible variables may help strengthen the claim.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 282 350
No. of Characters: 1461 1500
No. of Different Words: 154 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.098 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.181 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.591 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 110 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 88 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 55 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.625 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.313 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.321 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.562 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.03 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 63, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...k of evidence and reasoning weakens the writers argument. Details such as surveys and t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, lastly, may, so, then, therefore, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 19.6327345309 25% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1505.0 2260.96107784 67% => OK
No of words: 282.0 441.139720559 64% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.33687943262 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66709339048 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 204.123752495 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.574468085106 0.468620217663 123% => OK
syllable_count: 453.6 705.55239521 64% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.9560021343 57.8364921388 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.0625 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.625 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.125 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162692228601 0.218282227539 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0504054493613 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0538450638319 0.0701772020484 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0847857931329 0.128457276422 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0668270434891 0.0628817314937 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 98.500998004 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => 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.