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 with

The argument that expanding the coverage of weather and local news on all the news programs would attract more viewers and increase adverting profits may seem logical at the first glance. The author makes a valid argument, one would be correct if its premises were true. The argument also relies on assumptions, which suffer from ambiguity and dearth of solid evidences.

First of all, according to the writer, the former late-night news program was more beneficial than new program because the former more time devoted to program's weather and local news. However, the writer doesn't talk about any detail to compare both news programs entirely for proving its claim. For example, maybe the time devoted to national news increased just few minutes and this increased time can't essentially affect the whole news program and its profits. Or maybe a few numbers of people view the late-night news program and it is not reasonable to change whole news programs base on their point of view. The author should answer these significant questions in order to make more convincing conclusion.

Additionally, the author says that the new news program is not helpful because most of the complaints received from viewer were concerned with the station's coverage of weather and local news. But, the writer's assumption is unclear and needs more details to persuade people that the former program was more satisfying for people. For instance, the writer doesn't talk about total number late-night news program viewer. He also doesn't talk about total number of received complaints and the exact number of unsatisfied people; it is important in the sense that maybe only 10 complaints received and 6 of them were about concerning with weather and local news. So, the argument seriously needs more solid evidence to convince people that the change is necessary for both television station and viewer.

Finally, the author brings up the idea that loosing local businesses' advertising revenues are because of the new late-night news program, without making any evidence to prove its idea. For example, may be these local business canceled their advertising because of high advertising cost or maybe they prefer using other television stations' advertising services. Considering these subjects is essential to make a logical decision.

In conclusion, the argument that the television station needs to devote more weather and local news time to its entire news program, would not necessary be wrong. However, the argument have to consider more details and makes clear and solid evidence for persuading people that the conclusion is the best choice and there is no alternative way for solving the problem.