The memorandum from the business manager of television station suggests returning to devoting of time on weather and local news to increase viewership. The manager arrives at this conclusion based on the evidence that there have been multiple complaints regarding this change of news structure. However, the conclusion relies on several unwarranted assumptions. If these assumptions are not substantiated, it dramatically weakens the argument for this suggestion made by the author. Hence, three evidences must be addressed.
First evidence that is required is in regards to the likelihood that the complaints are going to follow the same trend. There is a possibility that watching local and weather news was indispensable last year, this might not be the case this year. Take an instance, that the weather of particular region was constantly harsh. Hence, creating a need for checking upon the local and weather news. While it is also possible that people will want to see national news this year, due to elections or any other major national event going on. This will create a scenario where people will file complaints for not covering the national news. If any of the scenarios hold merit then the author's suggestion is significantly weakened.
Secondly, it is possible that the local business have canceled the contracts for other reasons apart from the television station not displaying weather and local news. If this is the case than this reasoning of manager becomes hollow. Consider a case where this business is running out of funds, then there is possibility that it will curtail the existing budget; canceling the contracts with the television station. Another case is, that the station is behaving unethically in their contract, making the business cut ties with the station. If any of the cases are true than the author's argument does not hold water.
Lastly, there is a possibility that reverting back to weather and local news might not increase viewership. There is no direct correlation that can be defined as the one that made in the claim. Consider a case, where the people have already switched to other television stations. This means that if they are acquanited with the new station, than it is unlikely that they will return to this station. Take another instance, where the people have switched to smartphones for watching news than it is unlikely that the users will switch back to the station again. If any of these scenarios are likely, than the author's conclusion does not hold weight.
In conclusion, the suggestion made by manager accompanies with many unstated assumptions. Evidence in regards with to these assumptions is required in order to fully evaluate the argument. If further evidence is provided, then the manager's argument might hold water.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 36, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
.... First evidence that is required is in regards to the likelihood that the complaints are ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 634, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...nts for not covering the national news. If any of the scenarios hold merit then th...
^^
Line 3, column 678, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ny of the scenarios hold merit then the authors suggestion is significantly weakened. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 169, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... not displaying weather and local news. If this is the case than this reasoning of...
^^
Line 5, column 542, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...the business cut ties with the station. If any of the cases are true than the auth...
^^
Line 5, column 580, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
.... If any of the cases are true than the authors argument does not hold water. Lastly...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 342, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
...ey are acquanited with the new station, than it is unlikely that they will return to...
^^^^
Line 7, column 600, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
.... If any of these scenarios are likely, than the authors conclusion does not hold we...
^^^^
Line 7, column 609, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...of these scenarios are likely, than the authors conclusion does not hold weight. In ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 232, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
... further evidence is provided, then the managers argument might hold water.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, lastly, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, while, apart from, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.5258426966 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 58.6224719101 75% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 12.9106741573 170% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2347.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 453.0 442.535393258 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18101545254 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71712097095 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.42825607064 0.4932671777 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 723.6 704.065955056 103% => 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
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.9284136891 60.3974514979 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 90.2692307692 118.986275619 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4230769231 23.4991977007 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.30769230769 5.21951772744 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 7.80617977528 128% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.054843945389 0.243740707755 23% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.018152457124 0.0831039109588 22% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.024384438875 0.0758088955206 32% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0346318506297 0.150359130593 23% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0198553817403 0.0667264976115 30% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 100.480337079 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 36, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
.... First evidence that is required is in regards to the likelihood that the complaints are ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 634, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...nts for not covering the national news. If any of the scenarios hold merit then th...
^^
Line 3, column 678, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ny of the scenarios hold merit then the authors suggestion is significantly weakened. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 169, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... not displaying weather and local news. If this is the case than this reasoning of...
^^
Line 5, column 542, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...the business cut ties with the station. If any of the cases are true than the auth...
^^
Line 5, column 580, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
.... If any of the cases are true than the authors argument does not hold water. Lastly...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 342, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
...ey are acquanited with the new station, than it is unlikely that they will return to...
^^^^
Line 7, column 600, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
.... If any of these scenarios are likely, than the authors conclusion does not hold we...
^^^^
Line 7, column 609, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...of these scenarios are likely, than the authors conclusion does not hold weight. In ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 232, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
... further evidence is provided, then the managers argument might hold water.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, lastly, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, while, apart from, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.5258426966 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 58.6224719101 75% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 12.9106741573 170% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2347.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 453.0 442.535393258 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18101545254 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71712097095 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.42825607064 0.4932671777 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 723.6 704.065955056 103% => 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
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.9284136891 60.3974514979 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 90.2692307692 118.986275619 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4230769231 23.4991977007 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.30769230769 5.21951772744 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 7.80617977528 128% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.054843945389 0.243740707755 23% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.018152457124 0.0831039109588 22% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.024384438875 0.0758088955206 32% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0346318506297 0.150359130593 23% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0198553817403 0.0667264976115 30% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 100.480337079 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.