The following is a memorandum from the business manager of WLSS television station.
“Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with the station’s coverage of weather and local news. In addition, several local businesses that used to run advertisements during our late-night news program have just cancelled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to our news programs and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should expand the coverage of weather and local news on all our news programs.”
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 business manager of a television station claims that the television station should restore time devoted to weather and local news in order to attract more viewers and avoid losing further revenues. While the argument may have some merit, it is not cogent enough to assert a conclusion. The evidence must be evaluated in order to determine the argument's validity. If the evidence weakens the argument, then the argument remains unsubstantiated and is in need for correction.
Firstly, the evidence needed for evaluation is the complaints from viewer's regarding the television's weather and local news coverage. While the author assumes that many of the complaints are in regards to the decreased attention towards weather and local news, the evidence does not suffice the assumption. The author does not mention the quantity of complaints. Were there 100 complaints or only 2 complaints? If only two customer complained, then it would not make an entire difference to the changes in coverage. Also, the author does not mention what the complaints were specificially about. Were the complaints ascribed to the decreased amount of time in weather and local news? Or were the complaints centered on the dissatisfaction of how accurate the weather and local news are? The evidence weakens the author's argument since it does not specify how many customers are complaining and what the customers were complaining about. Therefore, the author must provide evidence of an open-ended survey that documents the number and type of complaints from customers. If not, then the argument holds no merit.
Secondly, the evidence needed for evaluation is the loss of advertising contracts. The author assumes that local businesses cancled their advertising contracts due to the decreased weather and local news coverage. However, the evidence is not enough to support the assumption. Perhaps, the local businesses canceled their advertising contracts in order to save money and put profit into their businesses. On the other hand, local businesses may be running out of business and are deprived in funds to support advertisment. Therefore, the evidence weakens the author's argument that restoring time will prevent further adverstising revenues from canceling their contracts. The author must provide specific evidence indicating that local businesses are disinterested or simply are running out of business and need to put the profit elsewhere.
Lastly, the evidence needed to be evaluated is the increased and decreased time in media coverage. The author assumes that the decrease in weather and local news has led to decreased viewers. However, the evdience is not sufficient enough to support the claim. The author does not specify how long national news is covered and how little weather and local news are covered. Is the timing for national news only five minutes more or twenty minutes more? If national news are covered longer by only five minutes, then it wouldn't make must of a difference. However, if national news was covered for 45 minutes and only 5 minutes was left for wether and local news, then it would make a difference.
In conclusion, the author needs to provide relevant evidence to support the claim. If not, then the argument remains unsubstantiated.
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: 31 15
No. of Words: 521 350
No. of Characters: 2693 1500
No. of Different Words: 186 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.778 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.169 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.74 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 209 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 175 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 116 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 68 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.806 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.981 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.581 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.322 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.322 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.111 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 348, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguments'' or 'argument's'?
Suggestion: arguments'; argument's
... be evaluated in order to determine the arguments validity. If the evidence weakens the a...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 192, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
...assumes that many of the complaints are in regards to the decreased attention towards weather...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 424, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'customer' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'customers'.
Suggestion: customers
...aints or only 2 complaints? If only two customer complained, then it would not make an e...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 813, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ocal news are? The evidence weakens the authors argument since it does not specify how ...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1113, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... not, then the argument holds no merit. Secondly, the evidence needed for evalua...
^^^^
Line 3, column 560, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...nt. Therefore, the evidence weakens the authors argument that restoring time will preve...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 520, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...ed longer by only five minutes, then it wouldnt make must of a difference. However, if ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, while, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 11.1786427146 206% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 35.0 16.3942115768 213% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2747.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 520.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28269230769 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77530192783 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82156674657 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.376923076923 0.468620217663 80% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 870.3 705.55239521 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 19.0 8.76447105788 217% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 31.0 19.7664670659 157% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.4470661958 57.8364921388 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.6129032258 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7741935484 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.41935483871 5.70786347227 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.272367022628 0.218282227539 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0785911436268 0.0743258471296 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0929123334013 0.0701772020484 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150783240363 0.128457276422 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103137422472 0.0628817314937 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.3799401198 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.