The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station.
“Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station’s coverage of weather and local news. In addition, local businesses that used to advertise during our late-night news program have just canceled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to the program and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should restore the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level.”
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 decision to restore the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level is one that should be made with more careful consideration of evidence, data, and viewer/client feedback by the business manager of this television station. Many assumptions have been made on the business manager’s part about the exact cause of the problems with the program. He or she should approach the idea of making changes with more caution.
The memorandum stated that more complaints received from viewers were concerned with the station’s coverage of weather and local news, but it did not state the nature of the complaints. The viewers may have been complaining about the accuracy or quality of the weather and local news rather than the shortened length of the segments. More specific information about the complaints--including whether they were about the late-night edition or about other news programs during the day--would support the argument because it would show if there was a relationship between the shortened length of the segments in the late-night news program and the viewers’ dissatisfaction with these particular segments. Sometimes it is the personalities and the chemistry of the news anchors that govern people’s decisions about which station’s news they watch. The business manager will never know unless he asks the viewers exactly why they do or do not enjoy watching his news program.
Additionally, stated in the memorandum was the fact that local businesses had just canceled their advertising contracts with the station. An assumption being made is that the reason businesses were pulling their ads was directly related to the shortened segments of the weather and local news. Considering the fact that more than one business just pulled their ad, other factors could have been involved, such as any controversy that the station’s national news may have recently brought up. Janet Jackson’s notorious wardrobe malfunction comes to mind. Though that incident happened during a national sporting event, there are many controversial national news topics that have the potential to create such a stir with the local public. If the manager could establish that businesses discontinued advertising contracts specifically because they were displeased with the change in news coverage, and that the remaining advertisers are on the verge of leaving if coverage of weather and local news is not increased, that information would help eliminate other possible explanations.
Evidence that research had been conducted to find specific ways to attract viewers to a news program would also strengthen the argument. Moreover, findings from research about what viewers would like to see on the program may help. Assuming that they would like to see more weather and local news does not seem safe. Perhaps they are looking for something besides national news, local news, and weather all together. Or possibly they are tuning into another station that has something in their program that draws their attention. Data about which ratings are highest and what people are watching would assist the business manager in his or her decision about how to change the program.
The station cannot expect to go back to the programming it once had and be successful. Obviously, something about the previous programming must not have been working; otherwise they would not have changed their structure the last time. They cannot expect to see different results if they go back to the same structure. Careful analysis of all the factors I have presented is the best first step to making a change in the structure of their news program.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-01-20 | sayefsakin | 23 | view |
| 2017-03-06 | lisamgreen | 58 | view |
- The following was written as a part of an application for a small-business loan by a group of developers in the city of Monroe."Jazz music is extremely popular in the city of Monroe: over 100,000 people attended Monroe's annual jazz festival last summer, 83
- People should question the rules of authority as opposed to accepting them passively.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement andexplain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and 50
- In a laboratory study of two different industrial cleansers, CleanAll was found to remove 40% more dirtand kill 30% more bacteria than the next best cleanser. Furthermore, a study showed that employeesworking at buildings cleaned with CleanAll used far fe 58
- Company X has just switched to a 4-day workweek, mandating that employees work 10 hours per day fromMonday to Thursday instead of 8 hours per day from Monday to Friday. Although the policy is new,Company X claims that the policy will help to increase prof 66
- Five years ago, the local university built two new dormitories through different contractors: AlephConstruction and Gimmel Builders. The buildings were nearly identical, though it cost Gimmel Buildersapproximately 20 percent more to construct their dormit 50
Comments
It seems like that your
It seems like that your writing is just the copy version of official sample essay from OG
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'besides', 'but', 'first', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'moreover', 'so', 'then', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.243119266055 0.25644967241 95% => OK
Verbs: 0.169724770642 0.15541462614 109% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0795107033639 0.0836205057962 95% => OK
Adverbs: 0.045871559633 0.0520304965353 88% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0443425076453 0.0272364105082 163% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.111620795107 0.125424944231 89% => OK
Participles: 0.0565749235474 0.0416121511921 136% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.87291313156 2.79052419416 103% => OK
Infinitives: 0.025993883792 0.026700313972 97% => OK
Particles: 0.00152905198777 0.001811407834 84% => OK
Determiners: 0.107033639144 0.113004496875 95% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0290519877676 0.0255425247493 114% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0137614678899 0.0127820249294 108% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3667.0 2731.13054187 134% => OK
No of words: 583.0 446.07635468 131% => OK
Chars per words: 6.28987993139 6.12365571057 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.91379618374 4.57801047555 107% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.368782161235 0.378187486979 98% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.313893653516 0.287650121315 109% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.224699828473 0.208842608468 108% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.138936535163 0.135150697306 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87291313156 2.79052419416 103% => OK
Unique words: 263.0 207.018472906 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451114922813 0.469332199767 96% => OK
Word variations: 54.0664750724 52.1807786196 104% => OK
How many sentences: 24.0 20.039408867 120% => OK
Sentence length: 24.2916666667 23.2022227129 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.2571517458 57.7814097925 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.791666667 141.986410481 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2916666667 23.2022227129 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.458333333333 0.724660767414 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.58251231527 0% => OK
Readability: 55.6810320183 51.9672348444 107% => OK
Elegance: 1.58235294118 1.8405768891 86% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.570023602739 0.441005458295 129% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.148218995266 0.135418324435 109% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0867477429453 0.0829849096947 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.58046572526 0.58762219726 99% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.154185008991 0.147661913831 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.232598360614 0.193483328276 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110442928768 0.0970749176394 114% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.476585997672 0.42659136922 112% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.104565007021 0.0774707102158 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.40063003306 0.312017818177 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0747972630769 0.0698173142475 107% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.87684729064 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.82512315271 207% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 9.0 2.82389162562 319% => OK
Total topic words: 21.0 14.657635468 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.