Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted...
The business manager of the television station has prepared a strategy to recover lost revenues but his stategy lacks detailed research and is based on biased assumptions. He has not researched if the advertisement contracts are actually cancelled due to less time devoted to local news. Several factors are possible for the cancelling of those contracts. Are more number of people watching television? Is there a more popular television station started? Is the advertisement revenue same or increased? These are some questions that cast a doubt on the validity of the manager's conclusion.
Also, there has been no indications of how efficient a television advertisement is. The manager simply assumed that the decrease in revenue is due to decrease in time allocation for weather and local news which might not necessarily be true. It is entirely possible that business owner are not welcoming more customers through the means of television advertisements. If less people are watching the television, they would be reluctant to pay for television advertisements. The opposite is also possible that the business is welcoming enough customers that they no longer feel the need of advertising themselves.
Furthermore, the viewers were concerned with the weather report and the local news. But what actually was the concern is not specified. Were they concerned with the station allocating small time for local news and weather, or the quality of report on this aspect. It is preferable for a local televsion station to broadcast local news more. But attention should be paid for the viewers response abou what they want to see. This guarantees in increase on number of viewers rather than the manager's assumption of more time devoted to local news and weather report.
The validity of conclusion can be also questioned on the basis that more viewers do not assure more revenue. It is due to the efficiency of the advertisement and proven business results. A rigorous research should be done to determine a way to make advertisements more convincing which would attract more business owners.
Thus, there are several fallacies in the manager's conclusion about increasing revenues. A more thorough research is required and evidences should be collected to support the conclusion. The conclusion made currently is based on ungrounded assumptions and susceptible to be proven wrong.
| 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 |
- The first step to self-knowledge is rejection of the familiar. 62
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 58
- Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted... 72
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 50
Comments
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: 24 15
No. of Words: 379 350
No. of Characters: 1969 1500
No. of Different Words: 173 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.412 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.195 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.932 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 148 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 95 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.792 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.686 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.417 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.284 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.492 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.053 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 570, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
...hat cast a doubt on the validity of the managers conclusion. Also, there has been no ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 371, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... means of television advertisements. If less people are watching the television, the...
^^^^
Line 5, column 379, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'viewers'' or 'viewer's'?
Suggestion: viewers'; viewer's
...e. But attention should be paid for the viewers response abou what they want to see. Th...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 489, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
...se on number of viewers rather than the managers assumption of more time devoted to loca...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 42, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
...hus, there are several fallacies in the managers conclusion about increasing revenues. A...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, furthermore, if, so, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2011.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 379.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30606860158 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99234501618 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.467018469657 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 638.1 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.1319946027 57.8364921388 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 83.7916666667 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.7916666667 23.324526521 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.91666666667 5.70786347227 34% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0380483763812 0.218282227539 17% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0121540260247 0.0743258471296 16% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0213243291015 0.0701772020484 30% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0193926757595 0.128457276422 15% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0216642015891 0.0628817314937 34% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.3799401198 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 48.3550499002 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.22 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 12.3882235529 48% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.