The argument quotes the manager of a television station stating that their late night program has devoted increased time to national news instead of weather and local news. However, because of increased complaints and dropping advertising revenue, the manager's recommendation is to restore time devoted to weather and local news to avoid losing any further advertising revenues.
The argument lacks credible sources to back the claims made and therefore lacks reliability.
First and foremost, there is no information about the change in viewership with the change in the late-night program's content. The argument does not consider if there has been an increase in the viewership and the quality of the late-night program.
Secondly, the argument also fails to analyse if this increase in the number of complaints pertaining to weather and local-news coverage is absolute in number or a phenomenon relative to the improved quality of the late night show. The manager is lacking statistical precision by neither providing an estimate of the television viewers for the late-night program nor by providing percentage of viewers complaining about the coverage.
Moreover, there is no description of the nature of consumer complaints apart from the mention of 'most' of them being concerned with the coverage of weather and local news. The argument could have been more credible by providing deeper insights and an in-depth analysis of these complaints.
Furthermore, there is no evidence relating the cancelation of advertising contracts with the content of the late night program. Without any proof, it becomes doubtful if these cancelations were truly related to the late-night program or were merely a correlation. The argument could have been stronger by showing a causality between these two, if any.
In conclusion, the argument falls flat in terms of lacking evidence to support the recommendation of switching back to the local and weather news. It would have been strengthened by considering the aforementioned points, and providing supporting proof for the claims made in the argument.
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/over-past-year-our…
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 326 350
No. of Characters: 1736 1500
No. of Different Words: 151 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.249 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.325 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.921 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 136 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 124 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.286 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.352 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.393 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.687 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.119 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 253, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
...s and dropping advertising revenue, the managers recommendation is to restore time devot...
^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 140, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: absolute
...g to weather and local-news coverage is absolute in number or a phenomenon relative to the improve...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, apart from, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 13.6137724551 7% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1784.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 326.0 441.139720559 74% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47239263804 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24917287072 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96903360126 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 204.123752495 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.478527607362 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 552.6 705.55239521 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.001493253 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.428571429 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2857142857 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.07142857143 5.70786347227 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.291012167511 0.218282227539 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103440676854 0.0743258471296 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0985599601214 0.0701772020484 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133071727425 0.128457276422 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105755231718 0.0628817314937 168% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.74 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.