To increase the listener numbers, the manager of WWAC radio station suggests that WWAC should replace the current rock-music format with a news and talk format. To support the purpose, the writer contends that a group of retired people have moved here, who do not like music formats as the local sales of recorded music are declining. Thus, in order to satisfy them, the passage indicates that WWAC should change to a news and talk format, which is increasingly popular in this area. Though some of the reasons listed above are true, I hold the view that the conclusion is not convincing.
First and foremost, it cannot be proved whether the people who move here are retired or not. Perhaps they are young people who want a different yet warm place to live in, or perhaps they are workers who are from other cities. Thus, without figuring out the characteristics of these people, we could not draw the conclusion that they would influence the listener numbers because it is likely that they do not like to listen to radio at all. Even if they are retired, there is no strong evidence which could show that retired people do not like rock music.
Furthermore, a decline in local sales of recorded music does not mean that people have little interest in music. Maybe the content of the music is too out of fashion to attract listeners. Besides, the price of this music is probably too high. In a word, there are many factors that contribute to the decline, so one could not be sure that people do not like music.
Last but not least, though it is a good idea to switch to a music format which suits people's appetite, it is not convincing that a news and talk format is popular in the area because the article does not show solid evidence. Perhaps the survey on the favorite type of music only asks those elderly people. Or perhaps the adults who have a lot of work to do on workdays do not have the time to express their opinions. Thus, it is not convincing that a news and talk format would attract more listeners.
So, I strongly disagree with the assumption in the passage for the reasons above.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 378 350
No. of Characters: 1679 1500
No. of Different Words: 175 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.409 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.442 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.242 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 108 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 77 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 37 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 17 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.235 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.475 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.341 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.582 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.086 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 241, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ends that a group of retired people have moved here, who do not like music format...
^^
Line 1, column 493, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...creasingly popular in this area. Though some of the reasons listed above are true, I hold t...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 426, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ikely that they do not like to listen to radio at all. Even if they are retired, ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, furthermore, if, may, so, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 16.3942115768 30% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1731.0 2260.96107784 77% => OK
No of words: 378.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.57936507937 5.12650576532 89% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40933352052 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.31739538698 2.78398813304 83% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489417989418 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 543.6 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59920159681 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9742622601 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.823529412 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2352941176 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.70786347227 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.191007867656 0.218282227539 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0583173104878 0.0743258471296 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0468483206888 0.0701772020484 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0944133065846 0.128457276422 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0558124561544 0.0628817314937 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 48.3550499002 137% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.58 12.5979740519 76% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.