"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 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 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 our coverage of weather and local news on all our news programs."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The following argument is not cogent as it lacks essential evidences that are necessary in determining its validity. Primarily, the argument suggests that advertisement revenues have been lost as a result of their program and its main conclusion asserts that reverting the program to its previous order will remedy the loss. Ideally, this is not guaranteed thus rendering the conclusion unwarranted.
The argument suggests that the program devoted more time to national news and not weather or local news; complaints have been made though the nature and extent of the complaints has not been lucidated. Therefore, one cannot really ascertain that indeed complaints have been made. Who made the compliants? Many viewers or just a few individuals making numerous complaints. Without this information, one cannot objectively deduce that the program is indeed ineffective. The author should have clearly stated the nature and extent of these complaints so as to make his case strong.
In addition, the author heavily relies on the assumption that advertisement revenue was lost as a result of the program sturcture. Though this may hold true, only the advertising clients may really give a reason of terminating their contracts. They may have left after recieving cheaper deals from other stations, or perhaps resorted to cutting their internal budget. As such, the assumption is quite subjective as the author should rely on feedback given by the clients themselves rather than speculations. If the clients attest that they terminated the contracts on the new programs accounts, then this would strengthen the argument and if otherwise, the arguments would definitely be weakened.
The author also recommends that their old program be restored based on the assumptions aforementioned so as to solve the revenue loss and perhaps gain more veiwers. Deciding on his/her recommendation however would only be prudent if his/her claims are proved to be true as well as further insight. Until then, the station should factor in other factors. They may do this through conducting an extensive and relevant study by collecting data from their clients and the viewers alike. The argument would be warranted if more evidence is provided.
In conclusion, the argument may only be warranted if the author proves his/her claims and most importantly, if he provided more valid evidences supporting his claims.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: The argument suggests that the program devoted more time to national news and not weather or local news; complaints have been made though the nature and extent of the complaints has not been lucidated.
Error: news Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: lucidated Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: Who made the compliants?
Error: compliants Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: In addition, the author heavily relies on the assumption that advertisement revenue was lost as a result of the program sturcture.
Error: sturcture Suggestion: structure
Sentence: They may have left after recieving cheaper deals from other stations, or perhaps resorted to cutting their internal budget.
Error: recieving Suggestion: receiving
Sentence: The author also recommends that their old program be restored based on the assumptions aforementioned so as to solve the revenue loss and perhaps gain more veiwers.
Error: veiwers Suggestion: viewers
---------------
argument 1 -- not exactly
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 380 350
No. of Characters: 1974 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.415 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.195 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.751 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 155 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 116 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.252 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.284 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.511 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 549, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...e nature and extent of these complaints so as to make his case strong. In addition, t...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 103, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...based on the assumptions aforementioned so as to solve the revenue loss and perhaps gain...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, really, so, then, therefore, thus, well, as to, in addition, in conclusion, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 55.5748502994 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2029.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 377.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38196286472 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84706959689 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535809018568 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 607.5 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.010611096 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.45 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.85 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
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: 0.121138055611 0.218282227539 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0343071661578 0.0743258471296 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0610289492788 0.0701772020484 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.060633595926 0.128457276422 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0581011740954 0.0628817314937 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.