The argument claims that in order to increase viewership of their program and also avoid losing advertising revenue, they should devote more time to their weather and local news coverage. This claim is based on a lot of assumptions and needs a lot of evidence and hence the argument is unconvincing and has a lot of flaws.
First, the argument states that most of the stations complains were related to the coverage of the weather and the local news. However, the complains have not been mentioned. For example, if the complains were for the local news not mentioning the correct facts, increasing the air time would further increase complains and deteriorate the image of the television station. We have no clear evidence that the complains wanted more air time or whether they were simply for any other reason like listing the mistakes in the coverage.
Second, the argument mentions no clear evidence that the companies are cancelling their contracts because of the low air time of weather or local news. Probably, the advertisers had other reasons for cancelling their contracts. What if there was some newer channel which were more profitable for the advertising companies or if they wanted to move on to some other form of advertizing and want to cut costs by giving up on television station. A lot of evidence is needed to firmly back the television station's claim.
Third, we have no concrete evidence that if we restore the weather and local channel the viewership of the channel would increase. For example, within the past year the country has started doing exceptionally well in sports. The viewers want to watch national news about how well their country's team is doing in competitions and not local and weather news, increasing air time for weather and local news would infact have a detrimental effect on the viewership. Hence we need more evidence about viewership tastes which can be found out by comprehensive surveys about the programs the target audience wants to watch.
Based on these reasons the argument falls short on a lot of issues and needs a lot of evidence to make up for it. Until more evidence is provided about the nature of complains, the reasons for companies to cancel advertising and the programs that the audience prefer watching, we can say the argument is clearly flawed and its claim is open to debate.
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 398 350
No. of Characters: 1916 1500
No. of Different Words: 172 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.467 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.814 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.553 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 127 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 102 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.875 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.784 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.688 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.359 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.599 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.143 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 463, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...a detrimental effect on the viewership. Hence we need more evidence about viewership ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, second, so, third, well, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1958.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 398.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91959798995 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46653527281 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6037328515 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.437185929648 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 602.1 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.1009135398 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.375 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.875 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.3125 5.70786347227 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => 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: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.235883107454 0.218282227539 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0856400273518 0.0743258471296 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0897379553453 0.0701772020484 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140651231686 0.128457276422 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0717596156989 0.0628817314937 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 98.500998004 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.