The following appeared in a memorandum from the manager of WWAC radio station.
"To reverse a decline in listener numbers, our owners have decided that WWAC must change from its current rock-music format. The decline has occurred despite population growth in our listening area, but that growth has resulted mainly from people moving here after their retirement. We must make listeners of these new residents. We could switch to a music format tailored to their tastes, but a continuing decline in local sales of recorded music suggests limited interest in music. Instead we should change to a news and talk format, a form of radio that is increasingly popular in our area."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
There is no doubt that the WWAC should change its style and program formats to cater the taste of potential listeners. Nonetheless, the owners' decision to switch the WWAC to news and talk format is groundless, and are not likely to reverse the decline in listener numbers.
To begin with, the owners concluded that the older residents moving to the listening area are not insterested in music, citing that local sales of recorded music has witnessed a decline. However, reasons attributed to this decrease are not clear. For example, people might show less enthusiasm to recorded music simply because its price is less affordable for the general consumers compared to before, or because online music is more convenient and up-to-date, attracting many consumers to new media. Thus, it is inadvisable to conclude that new residents are not interested in music.
What is more, the author did not elaborate the link between the sales of recorded music and people's interests in music. That is to say, the sales of recorded music do not reliably reflect people's tastes toward music. Imaginably, it is not impossible that the retired residents in the area are not willing to pay for recorded music, contributing to its unpopularity. Nontheless, the senior citizens favor classic music, and they would choose to listen to the radio, because it is free. Therefore, it is misleading to use the sales of recorded music as an indicator of people's preferences. Conversly, the radio station may gain huge popularity if they broadcast classic music. Were the owners of WWAC to use sales recorded misic to evaluate people's interests in music, they would have to show that the two are realiably correlated.
Lat but not least, the owners of the radio station dicieded to change the programs to news and talk format. It might be a good trial, but also a risky one. The current decline in listener numbers for rock-music format does prove that most of them are not interested in rock music, but this does not necessarily mean that they would be attracted by news and talk format. To draw this conclusion with confidence, the radio station should gather concrete evidence from the local residents. For instance, they could carry out a questionnaire, asking for people's prefrences for radio programs.
In conclusion, changing program format to attract more listeners is definitely imminent for WWAC radio station, but sufficient evidence should be presented before the owners of the radion station make any decision to reform.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, nonetheless, so, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, no doubt, to begin with, what is more, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2105.0 2235.4752809 94% => OK
No of words: 413.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09685230024 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67741216484 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 215.323595506 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489104116223 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 665.1 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.9981019467 60.3974514979 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.789473684 118.986275619 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7368421053 23.4991977007 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.31578947368 5.21951772744 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.257221134782 0.243740707755 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0821819520691 0.0831039109588 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0641272410139 0.0758088955206 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162388320091 0.150359130593 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0644599009279 0.0667264976115 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 100.480337079 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.