"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 canceled 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."
The statement given by the author depicts that increasing the time devoted for National news by compromising on the time given for local and weather news has led to unsatisfied viewers and also a reduction in the revenue due to advertisers rolling out of the contract. Though the author's claim superficially seems to be valid, it does have a few loopholes. Hence the claim might not be self-sustainable to hold the argument. I am substantiating my claim about the author's insufficient detail in paragraphs to come.
Firstly, the author mentions that most of the complaints received were concerned about the station not covering weather and local news. This evidence is incomplete without having the numbers from the past. In the past when the station used to broadcast local and weather news, what was the number of complaints received showing concern about lack of National news? Is the number more than the current complain count? That would help in understanding the viewer base. Are more viewers interested in National News or in Local and Weather news? What is the population the station must be aiming at and What should the strategy be to satisfy the majority of the viewers? These questions can be answered precisely by meticulously analyzing the data from the past and present, hence building a safe roadmap for the future.
Secondly, there is a concern which the author raises about the canceling of advertising contracts by local businesses. This statement is very misleading as it does not mention the exact reason behind the behind stepping back. It is an assumption of the station that the advertisers rolled back because the station gave more priority to National News. But how accurate is this assumption? It is equally possible to have other reasons behind this step taken by the local businesses. For example, the station would have failed to dedicate enough time for advertisements during the news hour, or maybe the contract between the station and local businesses had lapsed for the year. We are unsure of the reason here. So it is not safe to assume that it is because of the National News broadcast. A discussion with the local businesses would help them understand the issue.
Thirdly, the author assumes that he would get back the advertising revenue if he executes his plan of broadcasting local and weather news in the late-night news. This again is a wild guess. Not being aware of the reason behind these advertisers stepped back, it is not wise to take any steps to get them back without consulting them.
Though the concern of the author is valid, and he aims to find a solution to the issue cause, if the above reasons turn out valid, and the assumptions of the author end up faulty, it would cause more harm to the station then doing good. Hence this statement of the author is not sufficient an evidence for the claim he makes. Researching more on these reasons would guide him in the right direction.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 501 350
No. of Characters: 2394 1500
No. of Different Words: 234 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.731 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.778 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.633 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 124 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.556 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.333 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.407 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.276 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.454 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 351, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...be valid, it does have a few loopholes. Hence the claim might not be self sustainable...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 238, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...re harm to the station then doing good. Hence this statement of author is not suffici...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2440.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 496.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91935483871 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71922212354 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64107670473 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.467741935484 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 744.3 705.55239521 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 4.96107784431 242% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 58.2515005076 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.3703703704 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3703703704 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.62962962963 5.70786347227 64% => 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 : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.321632838086 0.218282227539 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0872682894582 0.0743258471296 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.105192941931 0.0701772020484 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171575531352 0.128457276422 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102377272184 0.0628817314937 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.