The memorandum from the business manager of television station suggests returning to devoting of time on weather and local news to increase viewership. The manager arrives at this conclusion based on the evidence that there have been multiple complaints regarding this change of news structure. However, the conclusion relies on several unwarranted assumptions. If these assumptions are not substantiated, it dramatically weakens the argument for this suggestion made by the author. Hence, three evidences must be addressed.
First evidence that is required is in regards to the likelihood that the complaints are going to follow the same trend. There is a possibility that watching local and weather news was indispensable last year, this might not be the case this year. Take an instance, that the weather of particular region was constantly harsh. Hence, creating a need for checking upon the local and weather news. While it is also possible that people will want to see national news this year, due to elections or any other major national event going on. This will create a scenario where people will file complaints for not covering the national news. If any of the scenarios hold merit then the author's suggestion is significantly weakened.
Secondly, it is possible that the local business have canceled the contracts for other reasons apart from the television station not displaying weather and local news. If this is the case than this reasoning of manager becomes hollow. Consider a case where this business is running out of funds, then there is possibility that it will curtail the existing budget; canceling the contracts with the television station. Another case is, that the station is behaving unethically in their contract, making the business cut ties with the station. If any of the cases are true than the author's argument does not hold water.
Lastly, there is a possibility that reverting back to weather and local news might not increase viewership. There is no direct correlation that can be defined as the one that made in the claim. Consider a case, where the people have already switched to other television stations. This means that if they are acquanited with the new station, than it is unlikely that they will return to this station. Take another instance, where the people have switched to smartphones for watching news than it is unlikely that the users will switch back to the station again. If any of these scenarios are likely, than the author's conclusion does not hold weight.
In conclusion, the suggestion made by manager accompanies with many unstated assumptions. Evidence in regards with to these assumptions is required in order to fully evaluate the argument. If further evidence is provided, then the manager's argument might hold water.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 36, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
.... First evidence that is required is in regards to the likelihood that the complaints are ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 634, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...nts for not covering the national news. If any of the scenarios hold merit then th...
^^
Line 3, column 678, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ny of the scenarios hold merit then the authors suggestion is significantly weakened. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 169, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... not displaying weather and local news. If this is the case than this reasoning of...
^^
Line 5, column 542, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...the business cut ties with the station. If any of the cases are true than the auth...
^^
Line 5, column 580, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
.... If any of the cases are true than the authors argument does not hold water. Lastly...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 342, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
...ey are acquanited with the new station, than it is unlikely that they will return to...
^^^^
Line 7, column 600, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
.... If any of these scenarios are likely, than the authors conclusion does not hold we...
^^^^
Line 7, column 609, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...of these scenarios are likely, than the authors conclusion does not hold weight. In ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 232, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
... further evidence is provided, then the managers argument might hold water.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, lastly, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, while, apart from, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2347.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 453.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18101545254 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71712097095 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 204.123752495 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.42825607064 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 723.6 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.9284136891 57.8364921388 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.2692307692 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4230769231 23.324526521 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.30769230769 5.70786347227 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.182449809522 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0536881105471 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.069727152956 0.0701772020484 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104022449841 0.128457276422 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0639367369582 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 36, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
.... First evidence that is required is in regards to the likelihood that the complaints are ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 634, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...nts for not covering the national news. If any of the scenarios hold merit then th...
^^
Line 3, column 678, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ny of the scenarios hold merit then the authors suggestion is significantly weakened. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 169, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... not displaying weather and local news. If this is the case than this reasoning of...
^^
Line 5, column 542, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...the business cut ties with the station. If any of the cases are true than the auth...
^^
Line 5, column 580, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
.... If any of the cases are true than the authors argument does not hold water. Lastly...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 342, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
...ey are acquanited with the new station, than it is unlikely that they will return to...
^^^^
Line 7, column 600, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
.... If any of these scenarios are likely, than the authors conclusion does not hold we...
^^^^
Line 7, column 609, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...of these scenarios are likely, than the authors conclusion does not hold weight. In ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 232, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
... further evidence is provided, then the managers argument might hold water.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, lastly, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, while, apart from, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2347.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 453.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18101545254 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71712097095 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 204.123752495 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.42825607064 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 723.6 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.9284136891 57.8364921388 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.2692307692 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4230769231 23.324526521 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.30769230769 5.70786347227 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.182449809522 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0536881105471 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.069727152956 0.0701772020484 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104022449841 0.128457276422 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0639367369582 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => 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.