The manager asserts that to avoid losing any further advertising revenues and to draw more viewers to their late-night news program, they should restore the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level. To substantiate his assertion, the manager mentions most of the complaints from viewers were concerned with their stations' reportage of weather and local news. Furthermore, he argues that the local businesses used to advertise their program have just canceled their advertising contracts. At first glimpse, this memorandum may seems plausible, but with deep analysis, there are some logical fallacies existing in the memorandum, which makes it quite unsound.
In the first place, the manager avers an unstated assumption that most of the complaints were concerned with their station’s coverage of weather and local news in their late-night news program. The memorandum never mentions what programs these complaints are concerned with. It is highly possible that the complaints were concerned with their station’s weather and local news in their noon news program. Without eliminating this possibility, the complaints of viewers surely can't be the reason to restore the time devoted to weather and local news.
Even if their complaints were about their late-night news program, that doesn't mean the station should restore the time of local and weather news. Maybe the complaints were criticizing their credibility of weather forecast. If this is the case, then what they should do is devoting more to the prediction of future weather rather than to the time.
Secondly, the manager establishes a false cause-effect relationship between the cancel of contracts and less time weather or local news reportage. The manager reaches this conclusion by considering that the reduced time in weather and local news precedes the cancel of contracts. This kind of tenuous evidence is undoubtedly insufficient, however, to reach this conclusion. Perhaps that the local businesses deciding to cancel the advertising contracts is because their program is a late-night program, which means their advertisement won't be noticed or watched by many people because most of the audience are sleeping at late night. Unless the manager could provide the reasons argued by the local business itself, it is ridiculous to make such a reckless conclusion.
To sum up, I will not be convinced by the memorandum until the manager provides more details about the content of the viewers' complaints, pointing out straightforwardly what they are complaining about and local businesses official announcement on the reason why they end up the contracts with the station. With these flaws, the conclusion that the manager makes is completely invalid.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ime devoted to weather and local news. Even if their complaints were about thei...
^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uture weather rather than to the time. Secondly, the manager establishes a fals...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 77, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...false cause effect relationship between the cancel of contracts and less time weather or l...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 256, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...time in weather and local news precedes the cancel of contracts. This kind of tenuous evid...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...us to make such a reckless conclusion. To sum up, I will not be convinced by th...
^^^^
Line 9, column 218, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'businesses'' or 'business's'?
Suggestion: businesses'; business's
...at they are complaining about and local businesses official announcement on the reason why...
^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'first', 'furthermore', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'then', 'kind of', 'to sum up', 'in the first place']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.250505050505 0.25644967241 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.151515151515 0.15541462614 97% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0949494949495 0.0836205057962 114% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0363636363636 0.0520304965353 70% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0505050505051 0.0272364105082 185% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.105050505051 0.125424944231 84% => OK
Participles: 0.0444444444444 0.0416121511921 107% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.89400273726 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Infinitives: 0.030303030303 0.026700313972 113% => OK
Particles: 0.00606060606061 0.001811407834 335% => OK
Determiners: 0.109090909091 0.113004496875 97% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0141414141414 0.0255425247493 55% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0121212121212 0.0127820249294 95% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2789.0 2731.13054187 102% => OK
No of words: 432.0 446.07635468 97% => OK
Chars per words: 6.45601851852 6.12365571057 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.57801047555 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.386574074074 0.378187486979 102% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.333333333333 0.287650121315 116% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.224537037037 0.208842608468 108% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.155092592593 0.135150697306 115% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89400273726 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 207.018472906 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.460648148148 0.469332199767 98% => OK
Word variations: 50.4831826544 52.1807786196 97% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.2022227129 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.9528506306 57.7814097925 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 154.944444444 141.986410481 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 23.2022227129 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.722222222222 0.724660767414 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 3.58251231527 167% => OK
Readability: 57.3333333333 51.9672348444 110% => OK
Elegance: 1.67796610169 1.8405768891 91% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.509753901602 0.441005458295 116% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.149612098249 0.135418324435 110% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.075993234458 0.0829849096947 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.613846145985 0.58762219726 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.161252075981 0.147661913831 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.243584041743 0.193483328276 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.128909167365 0.0970749176394 133% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.550325113497 0.42659136922 129% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0604250863824 0.0774707102158 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.390213244684 0.312017818177 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0797450092169 0.0698173142475 114% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.33743842365 48% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.87684729064 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 11.0 5.36822660099 205% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.82389162562 71% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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: This is not the final score. 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.