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.
The manager's conclusion that the time spent on local and weather news should be restored to their formal levels, which was more than what is currently being spent. The manager comes to this conclusion because of the complaints received from the viewers and also the reduced advertising contracts. However before this recommendation can be validated, the following evidence is required to evaluate it.
Firstly, we need to know what the complaints recieved from the viewers are about. It is told to us that most complaints were concerned with the station's coverage of local and weather news. It might be possible that the complaints are about the actual content of the news that is being covered and not about the amount of time that they are covered for. In that case, this reason becomes irrelevant and hence does not support the main conclusion. It might also be possible that the complaints received were asking for even less time be spent on local and weather news. In that case, this becomes a reason to not go through with the conclusion.
Secondly, we need to know the exact reason for the cancellation of advertisements of local businesses. The manager is concerned with advertisers cancelling their advertising contracts for night time advertising. The manager assumed that the advertisers have cancelled their contracts because lesser time is spent on local and weather news. It might be possible, that the advertisers' business has run into some losses or diffculties due to which they have cancelled their contracts. In such a case, this reason also does not support the main conclusion.
Thirdly, we need to know whether reverting back to old schedules is going to help the station in protecting its advertising revenue and reduce the complaints received from the viewers. It might be possible as explained above, that the people complaining currently are concerned about the content rather than the amount of time it is being covered. In such case, increasing the amount of time will not necessarily solve the issue. Similarly, if there is some external economic condition forcing businesses to cut advertising costs, then the station might continue to lose its late night advertising revenue even after changing the time spent on local and weather news. It might also be possible that the current viewers are liking the increased time being spent on national news in which case, reducing it might result in a drop among the viewers and then lead to even more advertisers dropping out. Hence, this evidence will determine the efficacy of the recommendation of the manager.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now is flawed. As explained there is need for more evidence supporting the assumptions that viewers do not like the increased time being spent on national news and that local businesses are cancelling their advertising contracts because less time is spent on local and weather news. Finally, evidence is also required to support the assumption that reverting back to old allocations of time is going to help the station as intended and will not backfire. If these evidences are present, we can reliably determine whether the stated argument is valid or not.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 525 350
No. of Characters: 2617 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.787 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.985 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.663 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 173 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 150 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.875 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.176 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.583 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.327 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.493 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 5, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
The managers conclusion that the time spent on local...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 298, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...also the reduced advertising contracts. However before this recommendation can be valid...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 145, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'stations'' or 'station's'?
Suggestion: stations'; station's
...most complaints were concerned with the stations coverage of local and weather news. It ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 720, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...so be possible that the current viewers are liking the increased time being spent on natio...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, third, thirdly, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 38.0 19.6327345309 194% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 28.8173652695 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2673.0 2260.96107784 118% => OK
No of words: 525.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09142857143 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.78673985869 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70943660417 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.375238095238 0.468620217663 80% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 822.6 705.55239521 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 4.96107784431 323% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.7995716731 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.375 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.875 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.95833333333 5.70786347227 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 16.0 6.88822355289 232% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.324782966323 0.218282227539 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10186922296 0.0743258471296 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0939933376807 0.0701772020484 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210094709637 0.128457276422 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0700296564733 0.0628817314937 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.51 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.