The editor of a local newspaper sent the following memo to the managing editor of the paper:“Three years ago when we surveyed our subscribers, they complained about the quality of the reporting and writing in the paper. Since that time, we have made a c

Essay topics:

The editor of a local newspaper sent the following memo to the managing editor of the paper:

“Three years ago when we surveyed our subscribers, they complained about the quality of the reporting and writing in the paper. Since that time, we have made a concerted effort to hire older, more experienced journalists. According to our most recent survey, these changes have made a vast improvement. Not only has our subscriber base grown by 13%, but they also rated us higher on both reporting and writing. Therefore, it is evident that to continue to increase our readership, we should hire the most experienced journalists we can find, and gradually fire our younger, less experienced reporters."

The author argues that to continue the increase in in readership most experienced journalist should be hired and fire out the less experienced younger reporters.The above argument is flawed because it rely on unsupported assumption

The author assumes that hiring old and experienced journalist is the only reason to increase the readership.Since the above assumption is not mentioned what if there is another reason like periodical training to the existing journalist would also have been a cause of increased readership and what if since the readership base grown new experienced journalist had joined the firm If the author would have mentioned clearly that there is no other reason except hiring old and experienced journalist,it would have supported the argument

The author assumes that since experienced old journalist had contributed,all journalist should be old and younger less experienced had not contributed for the increase in readership.Since the above assumption is not mentioned what if younger journalist had also equal experience as old and had improved the quality of reporting and writing in the paper.If the author would have mentioned clearly that young journalist are less experienced and had not contributed to increase in readership it would have supported the argument

The authors argument fails because it has causal,sampling flaws.
He should have substantiated all his arguments.

Votes
Average: 4.1 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2019-11-24 mmtsaha92 55 view
2019-03-31 SOUMEDHIK 32 view
2017-09-14 elifyeg 72 view
2017-09-06 Ranganath Vaikuntham 50 view
2016-12-07 rekhanyc 33 view
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 49, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: in
...or argues that to continue the increase in in readership most experienced journalist ...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 162, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
... the less experienced younger reporters.The above argument is flawed because it rel...
^^^
Line 1, column 202, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'relies'?
Suggestion: relies
...The above argument is flawed because it rely on unsupported assumption The a...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...se it rely on unsupported assumption The author assumes that hiring old and e...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 6, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... rely on unsupported assumption The author assumes that hiring old and expe...
^^^
Line 3, column 114, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Since
... only reason to increase the readership.Since the above assumption is not mentioned w...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 400, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had mentioned'?
Suggestion: had mentioned
...alist had joined the firm If the author would have mentioned clearly that there is no other reason e...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 503, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , it
...pt hiring old and experienced journalist,it would have supported the argument Th...
^^^
Line 5, column 73, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , all
...perienced old journalist had contributed,all journalist should be old and younger le...
^^^^
Line 5, column 183, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Since
...tributed for the increase in readership.Since the above assumption is not mentioned w...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 354, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: If
...y of reporting and writing in the paper.If the author would have mentioned clearly...
^^
Line 5, column 368, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had mentioned'?
Suggestion: had mentioned
... and writing in the paper.If the author would have mentioned clearly that young journalist are less ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...it would have supported the argument The authors argument fails because it ha...
^^^
Line 7, column 8, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...d have supported the argument The authors argument fails because it has causal,sa...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 52, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , sampling
...ors argument fails because it has causal,sampling flaws. He should have substantiated al...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 48, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d have substantiated all his arguments.
^^^^^^^^^^^

Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'if', 'so']

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.206278026906 0.25644967241 80% => OK
Verbs: 0.224215246637 0.15541462614 144% => OK
Adjectives: 0.121076233184 0.0836205057962 145% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0538116591928 0.0520304965353 103% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0269058295964 0.0272364105082 99% => OK
Prepositions: 0.116591928251 0.125424944231 93% => OK
Participles: 0.0941704035874 0.0416121511921 226% => Less participles wanted.
Conjunctions: 3.23168467369 2.79052419416 116% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0179372197309 0.026700313972 67% => OK
Particles: 0.00448430493274 0.001811407834 248% => OK
Determiners: 0.112107623318 0.113004496875 99% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0358744394619 0.0255425247493 140% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0134529147982 0.0127820249294 105% => OK

Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1435.0 2731.13054187 53% => OK
No of words: 215.0 446.07635468 48% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.67441860465 6.12365571057 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82921379641 4.57801047555 84% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.409302325581 0.378187486979 108% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.325581395349 0.287650121315 113% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.26511627907 0.208842608468 127% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.204651162791 0.135150697306 151% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23168467369 2.79052419416 116% => OK
Unique words: 91.0 207.018472906 44% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.423255813953 0.469332199767 90% => OK
Word variations: 36.1667705217 52.1807786196 69% => OK
How many sentences: 2.0 20.039408867 10% => More sentences wanted.
Sentence length: 107.5 23.2022227129 463% => Sentence lengths are too long.
Sentence length SD: 657.5 57.7814097925 1138% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 717.5 141.986410481 505% => Less chars per sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 107.5 23.2022227129 463% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 2.0 0.724660767414 276% => Less Discourse Markers wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 16.0 3.58251231527 447% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 140.058139535 51.9672348444 270% => OK
Elegance: 1.36764705882 1.8405768891 74% => OK

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.402910707858 0.441005458295 91% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0502040555624 0.135418324435 37% => Sentence sentence coherence is low.
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0 0.0829849096947 0% => Sentences are so close to each other.
Sentence paragraph coherence: 1.0 0.58762219726 170% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 1.9860273226e-16 0.147661913831 0% => Sentences are similar to each other in a paragraph.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.212417594622 0.193483328276 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.19231840824 0.0970749176394 198% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.300104808767 0.42659136922 70% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.258089124593 0.0774707102158 333% => No any connections among paragraphs
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231854315509 0.312017818177 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.132318488933 0.0698173142475 190% => OK

Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.33743842365 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.87684729064 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.82512315271 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 1.0 6.46551724138 15% => More positive topic words wanted.
Negative topic words: 0.0 5.36822660099 0% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 1.0 14.657635468 7% => More topic words wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

---------------------
More content wanted. For issue essays, around 450 words, for argument essays, around 400 words.
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 41.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.5 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.