Author's argument that restoring the time devoted to weather and local news should be able to increase viewership and avoid losing advertising revenue is sounding logical based on other statements. However, we need to have strong quantitative evidences to support the idea whether return to former level would indeed be as beneficial as it has been assumed.
First of all, we would need the daily viewership numbers for both pre change and post change. This should tell us if viewers are not liking the change in general. It would be interesting to see the viewership accumulated by rival stations in the same time slot. If we are losing out to competitors then it can be a convincing argument that local and weather news is indeed important for viewers. If that is not the case then, we should look at other potential problems.
We would also need to check, actually how many complaints were raised against the change and compare the complaints against total viewership. We should understand that people sometimes show reluctance to accept change and might not like change due to the same bias. We would also like to know the crux of all complaints on quantitative basis, that what is the real reason behind complaints or we had the same level of complaints in the past and it is following the same trend. If there is a correlation in past and present then this change is having minimal effect.
We should also investigate the cancellation of advertising contracts during the late night show. We need to check whether there is a slowdown in the local economy by any means. Importantly, it would be beneficial if we can understand the type of product being advertised in the past and the demand of the same currently. It could be possible that demand of such products have gone down or inelastic so that advertisers do not feel the need to promote the product anymore. Similarly, we need to check the advertising rates of station in question as well as other stations. If others are giving value for money options then, it may be the case that advertisers are moving to them. One more thing we should check, is there reduction in advertising across all stations in the same time slot.
Hence, strong numerical evidences are required to evaluate whether we need to revert to former level or not. There could be external and internal factor ranging from viewership and number of complaints to broad economic factors such as slowdown in product demand and companies cutting advertising costs.
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/over-past-year-our…
----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 426 350
No. of Characters: 2030 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.543 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.765 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.612 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 141 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.3 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.619 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.329 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.529 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.21 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 151, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...ip and avoid losing advertising revenue is sounding logical based on other statements. Howe...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 126, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
... change. This should tell us if viewers are not liking the change in general. It would be inte...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 267, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...t not like change due to the same bias. We would also like to know the crux of all...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, hence, however, if, look, may, similarly, so, then, well, in general, such as, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 12.9520958084 193% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2075.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 426.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87089201878 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65600863075 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.474178403756 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 640.8 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 4.96107784431 302% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 0.0 8.76447105788 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.6458792499 57.8364921388 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.75 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.3 5.70786347227 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.114703077239 0.218282227539 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0404906778887 0.0743258471296 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0460029078804 0.0701772020484 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0733683105865 0.128457276422 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0364801557797 0.0628817314937 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.3799401198 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.5 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 98.500998004 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => 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.