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.
In the above statement, the author claims that they should devote more time to coverage of weather forecast and local news, in order to restore their decreased view rates. While supporting the argument, however, the author makes numerous assumptions that cannot be taken for granted, thus the argument remains largely unconvincing without further evidence to verify unjustified assumptions.
First and foremost, the author bases his or her claim on the presupposition that people become discontent with their limited coverage of weather and local news, based on recently-received complaints. However, it is unclear that the complaints are significant in size and quality to represent the whole population watching the late-night news programe. If those complaints have been of minority that share similar opinions or program preferences for weather and local commentary, the complaints can be a skewed perspective and not represent the general idea of people. Therefore, the author, in support of his or her assertion, needs to have provided the evidence pertaining to whether the data of complaints are fully representative of the whole population of the viewers.
Second another authorian claim is that the lack of coverage of weather and local news had caused a reduction in the advertisement contracts of local corporates, and therefore they may have to deal with more of them henceforth. However, the author may have neglected the possibilities that the dearth of coverage of them may not be the most consequential cause for cancelling the contracts. For instance, local companies may have prefered a channel to deal with international news with a wide range of viewers to show and advertize their products, or they might have just lacked the budget enough to continue their advertisement with late-night news. Thus, it is essential to provide the evidence pertaining that the lack of coverage of weather forecast and local news is the main reason of declining number of advertising contracts, as the argument largely relies on it.
Lastly, although inserting the section of weather forecast and local news in the program may have drawn more viewers who are interested in these parts, it does not necessarily guarantee that it would restore the rates of viewrs upto its previous level. This is mainly due to the likelihood that the main reason of decreasing view rates are not a issue of low coverage of weather and local news, and other factors may have played a main role. For example, people may have been reluctant to use the late-news show, as they had disliked the main presenter or program style, or their predilection had been moved toward other news channel that consists of a creative style and fun talks. Furthermore, there could have been a shift in people's preference from news to entertainment shows or music channels. In this case, even though they start to cover weather or local news, they would not be able to get high attraction of viewers unless they change the context of the programm from news to an entertainment show. In light of this, for the menorandum to be cogent, the author should have presented the proof that the lack of coverage of weather and local news is the main cause of the declining rates of view.
To sum u, the author's claim is not very supported well in the current form. Further evidence considering about the representativeness of complaints, causal relationship between decreasing number of advertisement and the low coverage of weather and local news not to mention the relationship between the problem of coverage and declining rates of view is essential in determining the validity of the author's conclusion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-30 | abirtanaz242 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-29 | olaobamide | 75 | view |
| 2020-01-29 | lekuleku | 55 | view |
| 2020-01-12 | sudesh tiwari | 55 | view |
| 2020-01-12 | AC1990 | 77 | view |
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner."Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Ce 48
- Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoni 66
- In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes littl 49
- The vice president of human resources at Climpson Industries sent the following recommendation to the company's president."In an effort to improve our employees' productivity, we should implement electronic monitoring of employees' Int 59
- Essay topics: In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the positi 62
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 597 350
No. of Characters: 3016 1500
No. of Different Words: 252 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.943 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.052 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.858 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 208 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 170 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 121 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 80 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 33.167 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.539 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.778 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.385 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.592 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.15 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 248, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: significant
..., it is unclear that the complaints are significant in size and quality to represent the whole popu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 345, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...reason of decreasing view rates are not a issue of low coverage of weather and lo...
^
Line 9, column 77, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Further,
...ery supported well in the current form. Further evidence considering about the represen...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 400, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...tial in determining the validity of the authors conclusion.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, hence, however, if, lastly, may, second, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 26.0 11.1786427146 233% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 28.8173652695 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 87.0 55.5748502994 157% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3078.0 2260.96107784 136% => OK
No of words: 597.0 441.139720559 135% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15577889447 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.94303383012 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90988860952 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 204.123752495 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.442211055276 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 951.3 705.55239521 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 33.0 22.8473053892 144% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 56.3213059701 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 171.0 119.503703932 143% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.1666666667 23.324526521 142% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 5.70786347227 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => 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: 0.277882208977 0.218282227539 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0998034811011 0.0743258471296 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0547643363332 0.0701772020484 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153732796531 0.128457276422 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0456670365442 0.0628817314937 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.5 14.3799401198 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.98 48.3550499002 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 12.197005988 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.24 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.06 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 143.0 98.500998004 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 11.1389221557 136% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.