GRE Argument: 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 period, most of

The author of the memorandum suggests that the reduction of the time devoted to weather news and local news in their late night show, an increase of time given to national news has diminished the reputation of the show among the audience as well as the local businesses. The author provides reasons such as an increasing concern of viewers in their complaints to the television station and a drastic reduction in the advertising by the local businesses during the show. However, on close scrutiny one can observe various weak links in the argument that stand out as conspicuous logical flaws. Each of which is discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.

Initially, it can be observed that the author fails to mention the reason why there has been an increase in time given to national news and reduction to the time given to weather and local news. Had the reason been mentioned, the reader would have had a clear picture. There could be a variety of reasons, it could have been due to the fact that there has been an increase in national audience to the show, thus it would be appropriate to cover national content rather than local content.

Secondly, it is not mentioned whether the complaints to the television were pertaining to a reduction of time to local and weather news. It could be the complaints are due to inaccurate information provided in the news or the new national viewers wanted a further reduction of the local news. Thus, the information provided is not sufficed to make a judgment.

Thirdly, there is no cogent explanation of why the local business advertisers have deviated from the late night show. A mere mention that the reduction of advertisers will not be sufficient information to conclude that it is because of the content of the news. A proper research and explanation is needed to understand the correlation between content and advertisers. The departure of the advertisers could also be due to reasons irrelevant to the shows content. In its current state the point is unconvincing.

Fourthly, the author without any factual or statistical evidence mentioned in the memorandum. Statistics would have helped put into perspective the reality of the effect of the change in content. Like if two out of the twenty advertisers have departed, then there is no cause for concern. However, if eighteen of the twenty advertisers depart then it can be considered as a serious issue.

Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. The argument needs to be considerably strengthened, by mentioning relevant facts in order to assess the merits of a certain situation. Therefore, in its present form the argument is unconvincing due to lack of substantial logic in support of its claim.