The writer of the argument recommends that the time devoted to weather and local news should be restored to its former level so as to attract more viewers to the late-night news program and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues; however, this recommendation cannot be accepted as it is in that it rests on a number of premises all of which can be challenged in one way or another.
The first problem with the argument is that the writer assumes that viewers mostly complained about the station’s coverage of weather and local news because it was shortened. However, there is no evidence to prove that most of the complaints received actually were because of the reduction of weather and local news. For example, maybe audiences were unsatisfied because the quality of coverage was poor and the style of the show was old-fashioned. Or maybe they didn’t provide their viewers with all-encompassing weather and local news as their news only covered some specific regions.
Another problem with the argument is that the writer assumes that local businesses canceled their advertising contracts because the time of weather and local news was reduced. But maybe these businesses canceled their contracts because their products’ adverts were not beneficial for them because they were not suitable for nights. They have probably changed them to another time of the day in order to gain more profit. Or maybe the price of ads in the middle of weather and local news was too high that local businesses didn’t find it economical and effective for selling more. besides, maybe they were unable to afford it.
A third problem with the argument is that the writer assumes that the number of advertising contracts and the viewers of the late-night program was decreased due to the lack of time for local and weather news. Firstly, there is no reasonable proof to confirm that this fall in the number of audiences has happened. Secondly, the decrease in the number of advertisements in the program may have nothing to do with the number of viewers.
In the final analysis, the writer’s recommendation cannot be taken to be correct because, as it was shown in the body paragraph above, it depends on a number of assumptions each of which is questionable. The recommendation can only be accepted if the weaknesses already referred to are all removed.
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones. 50
- "Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned wit 55
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 396 350
No. of Characters: 1918 1500
No. of Different Words: 172 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.461 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.843 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.68 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 136 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 62 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.286 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.519 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.396 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.396 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.161 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 126, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
... should be restored to its former level so as to attract more viewers to the late-night ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 590, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Besides
...nomical and effective for selling more. besides, maybe they were unable to afford it. ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, besides, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, third, as to, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1983.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 394.0 441.139720559 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03299492386 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85299622622 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.428934010152 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 625.5 705.55239521 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.3855716451 57.8364921388 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.2 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2666666667 23.324526521 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.70786347227 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.288186557935 0.218282227539 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104270988064 0.0743258471296 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0878609160627 0.0701772020484 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157855784194 0.128457276422 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0813685509718 0.0628817314937 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.3799401198 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 98.500998004 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 27.0 12.3882235529 218% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.