Weather and local news programs
The author concludes that going back to the previous state of broadcasting will help to attract more audiences and more advertisers. In making this conclusion, the author assumes that reducing the time for weather and local news is the only reason that provokes the audiences to complain and the advertisers to cancel their contract with the television station.
First of all, it may not be the reduced time of weather and local news program the audiences are complaining about, rather it may be the diminished quality of the weather and local news program. Usually, audiences favor the quality of a program and if the quality decline they tend to grumble. Therefore, increasing the time of that particular news will not help to attract more audience. If this is true, then the argument is weakened.
Secondly, the author thinks that the local advertisers cancelled their contract because of the reduction in time of weather and news. But it may not be true, it may be that those particular advertisers had made a loss in their business, thereby unable to pay for advertising. Hence, they cancelled their contract. Therefore, there is no relation between the cancellation of contracts and the reduction of that program time. And this fact is nothing but weakening the author's argument.
Finally, the author assumes that audiences' desire to view any show remains the same over the year. It may also be false. It is very likely that audiences don't want to watch the entire weather and local news, rather they might be inclined to watch national and international news. This might be the reason for their complaints. Therefore the television station needs to judge the choice of their audiences. Therefore, it contradicts and weakens the author's argument.
To sum up, it is very clear that the arguments in the prompts are flawed. More information is needed to strengthen the author's stance.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-26 | seoul_milk | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-18 | manas_0 | 75 | view |
| 2023-09-09 | gre_test | 63 | view |
| 2023-08-31 | tomlee0205 | 66 | view |
| 2023-08-31 | tomlee0205 | 78 | view |
- In our time specialists of all kinds are highly overrated We need more generalists people who can provide broad perspectives 50
- It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be sure to address the most compel 62
- Political leaders should withhold information from public 2 66
- Some people believe that scientific discoveries have given us a much better understanding of the world around us Others believe that science has revealed to us that the world is infinitely more complex than we ever realized 83
- Some people believe that scientific discoveries have given us a much better understanding of the world around us Others believe that science has revealed to us that the world is infinitely more complex than we ever realized 83
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 315 350
No. of Characters: 1540 1500
No. of Different Words: 143 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.213 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.889 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.617 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 108 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 89 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 59 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.579 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.218 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.302 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.515 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.045 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 468, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... this fact is nothing but weakening the authors argument. Finally, the author assume...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 155, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...false. It is very likely that audiences dont want to watch the entire weather and lo...
^^^^
Line 7, column 328, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ght be the reason for their complaints. Therefore the television station needs to judge t...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 449, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...erefore, it contradicts and weakens the authors argument. To sum up, it is very cle...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 120, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...information is needed to strengthen the authors stance.
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 136, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eeded to strengthen the authors stance.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 55.5748502994 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1591.0 2260.96107784 70% => OK
No of words: 314.0 441.139720559 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06687898089 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69405858159 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 204.123752495 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.455414012739 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 479.7 705.55239521 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.5434687622 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.7368421053 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5263157895 23.324526521 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52631578947 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.0674097271327 0.218282227539 31% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.038217291547 0.0743258471296 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0742745800933 0.0701772020484 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0516427883024 0.128457276422 40% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0372938600949 0.0628817314937 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.3550499002 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.197005988 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.83 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.6 8.32208582834 91% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 98.500998004 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.