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 battle between local and national news are a topic widely debated on the media. On one hand, people dictate that viewers prefer local content because they will be informed of the issues that actually are happening close to them. Another school of thought supports the idea that local news are more important because normally their subjects are more relevant to people. In the preceding statement, the author claims that the less time devoted to weather and local news on the late-night program has decreased the number of viewers and advertising revenue. Though this claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions. Regarding solely on the evidence that the memorandum offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid. Hence, his conclusion is weak and unconvincing, with several flaws.
The primary issue with the author’s reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The author cites the complains of viewers as the basis of his argument that people prefer weather and local news instead of national news. However, the scope and validity of the complaints is at issue. The business manager does not give any indication as to the real number of viewers who sent them or the content of other complaints. For example, the television station could have done a survey asking the majority of their viewers what they think about the topic instead basing only on the complaints. Also, the sample of people that actually sent a formal protest might be very small and not representative to the total number of viewers from this area. Therefore, the author’s premises lack any legitimate evidentiary support and thereby render his conclusion unacceptable.
In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The author implies that the local advertisers canceled their partnership due to the change on the programs. However, the memorandum fails to provide proof of the fact that less time dedicated to local news and weather are the main source of the cancellations. There are numerous other factors that could have generated that, such as the increase on the merchandising price or an economic crisis. The author wrongly assumes that if the television station restores the time devoted to weather and local news the views and advertising revenue will increase. This assumption may fail if other sources are affecting this decrease. Consequently, the local or national news may have no impact. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explications of the links between the television’s programs and the number of viewers and advertising he assumes exists.
While the argument has key issues in the premise and assumptions made by the manager, it is not to say that the entire argument is without base. For instance, before writing this memorandum the authors could have done an evaluation of the complaints number to see if they are substantial in relation to the total number of viewers. He could also have surveyed and talked with the local advertisers to see if less time devoted to weather and local news are in fact the main reason for the cancellation. Though there are several issues with the author’s reasoning at present, with research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.
In sum, the memorandum illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. The business manager needs to revisit the research and analysis done for the local viewers and advertisers and refine the suggestions proposed by him. If the author truly hopes to change the television station’s mind on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his arguments, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions and provide evidentiary support. Without these, his poorly reasoned argument is unlikely to convince many people.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 30 15
No. of Words: 632 350
No. of Characters: 3258 1500
No. of Different Words: 270 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.014 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.155 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.707 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 250 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 194 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 123 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.067 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.384 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.633 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.294 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.449 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.111 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, consequently, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, therefore, well, while, as to, for example, for instance, in addition, in fact, such as
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 : 27.0 11.1786427146 242% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 28.8173652695 167% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 73.0 55.5748502994 131% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3349.0 2260.96107784 148% => OK
No of words: 632.0 441.139720559 143% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29905063291 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.01394158123 4.56307096286 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87102195822 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 278.0 204.123752495 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.439873417722 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1049.4 705.55239521 149% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 18.0 8.76447105788 205% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 19.7664670659 152% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.4466339318 57.8364921388 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.633333333 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0666666667 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.23333333333 5.70786347227 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 19.0 6.88822355289 276% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.242585328625 0.218282227539 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0713320568808 0.0743258471296 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0933884159688 0.0701772020484 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150241356341 0.128457276422 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0738161998809 0.0628817314937 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 152.0 98.500998004 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.