"Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with the station's coverage of weather and local news. In addition, several local businesses that used to run advertisements during our late-night news program have just 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 the coverage of weather and local news on all our news programs."
The author claims that the decline in viewership of the late-night news program is linked with decreased focus on weather news. The argument seems full-proof on the surface but has a few fallacies which need to be elaborated upon for the reader to concur with the conclusion.
Firstly, their is a tacit assumption that the increased complaints concerned with the coverage of weather and local news is because of their lower runtime. The author does not specify the subject of the complains. It might be the case that the inferior quality of the already reduced coverage of these issues has infuriated most viewers or the station has been outrightly neglecting these portions of the coverage. If it is the case, the author's arguments are unfounded.
Secondly, the author implicitly connects the loss of advertising revenues with the changes in the late-night news program. The loss of advertising revenues might have nothing to do with the changes in the program and might be happening because of the decline in viewership, which could be mitigated by improving the quality of the new program broadcasted. Also, it might be that this is simply a coincidence and the actual reason is some sort of temporary recession in local businesses, discouraging them from investing in advertisement. In such a case, increasing the coverage of local news and weather would have no effect.
The author also assumes that simply increasing the coverage of weather and local news will increase their viewership. Viewership has a lot to do with trust of viewers in your services and the recent dip in quality of the news might have left their audience skeptical of their program. The author needs to show that the program has a loyal audience, who would definitely come back as soon as the coverage was back to their liking.
In conclusion, the author should provide explanation for his assumptions, else the argument presented is obstinate.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
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: 14 15
No. of Words: 319 350
No. of Characters: 1577 1500
No. of Different Words: 152 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.226 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.944 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.697 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 114 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 95 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 63 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.786 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.342 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.381 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.615 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.121 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 10, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...oncur with the conclusion. Firstly, their is a tacit assumption that the increase...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, in conclusion, sort of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1616.0 2260.96107784 71% => OK
No of words: 319.0 441.139720559 72% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.065830721 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7910075203 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 204.123752495 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489028213166 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 492.3 705.55239521 70% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => 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: 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: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5981544119 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.428571429 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7857142857 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.35714285714 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.184056853596 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0745562992522 0.0743258471296 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.075845366584 0.0701772020484 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102146691597 0.128457276422 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0519996680493 0.0628817314937 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => 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.