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.
The author suggests making drastic change from a rock-music station to a news-talk station because of a supposed decline in interest in music, increase in interest in talk radio, and a change in local age demographics. However, he fails to make a strong case for this change, instead presenting a disconnected series of purported facts that loosely relate to the situation at hand.
The author first states that listener numbers have declined, a statistic that is easily ascertainable. However, the remaining data is very vague. First, he concludes that interest in recorded music is down because local sales are down. His faulty assumption that local sales are indicative of interest undermines his ability to make a clear, logical decision. Sales could be down for many reasons. Perhaps the economy is down, or residents are discovering online sources for music or maybe local music stores have closed. A multitude of factors could contribute to the decline in sales, so this is not a valid reason to assume that listener interest in music is down. The author could make a better decision about adjustments to make to the radio station if he knew why sales are down. For example, if listeners prefer an online format, he could consider taking the radio station that direction. But without more specific information, the simple decline in recorded music sales does not provide enough information to act on.
Continuing to consider listener interest, the author states that talk radio is becoming more popular. However, he does not cite any survey data to back up this assertion. He is making an assumption as an attempt to buttress his reasoning for the decision to switch to talk radio. Additional evidence is needed regarding listener interest in order to determine what type of programming would make listeners of residents—new or old.
Building on that, the author desires to make listeners of new residents, who are retirees. If they are relatively new to the area, then any data gathered in recent years is not likely to include them. Additional economic and interest survey data should be gathered so that up to date information can be used to inform decisions about radio programming. The author seems to assume that retirees will enjoy talk radio, but this appears to be an assumption made based on his preconceived ideas rather than data-driven logic. No data is cited regarding their level of interest in talk radio. If his goal is the narrowly-focused idea of making the new retiree residents into listeners, he needs to gather data about their interest in talk radio that will support the directive to switch to talk radio.
Finally, the author also needs to consider the local market for radio and what other genres are available to residents. If the locale is already saturated with talk radio stations, they are unlikely to garner new listeners unless they can find a way to make the station stand out from the crowd. Another consideration is the availability of XM and online music and talk stations and programming. The on-demand aspect of online programming can be hard to compete with, and it is quite possible that this is the root of the decline in listeners. The author seems to make no consideration of the local market, other than local recorded music sales, and does not mention online music and talk availability whatsoever.
In short, the author needs to gather more data and observe it with an open mind before making a decision. A decline in listener numbers is certainly disconcerting, but taking the station into a completely new genre in hopes of gaining listeners is a drastic measure with such little evidence.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 74, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...res to make listeners of new residents, who are retirees. If they are relatively new t...
^^^^^^^
Line 12, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tic measure with such little evidence.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, regarding, so, then, for example, in short
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 92.0 55.5748502994 166% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3059.0 2260.96107784 135% => OK
No of words: 609.0 441.139720559 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02298850575 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.96768813016 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74111066519 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 204.123752495 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.433497536946 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 994.5 705.55239521 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 19.7664670659 147% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0613020157 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.482758621 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.70786347227 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.67664670659 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.140922555861 0.218282227539 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0432091423028 0.0743258471296 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0435711873974 0.0701772020484 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0877998172961 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0375525095282 0.0628817314937 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 98.500998004 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.