The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station 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 complain

In order to effectively evaluate the argument that has been presented, saying that the news program must return to its former style of news programming and focus on weather and local event in order to maintain and reinvigorate viewership, several pieces of evidence must be collected.

First, it must be determined whether the viewership of the channel has risen or fallen over the past year. The memorandum only says that the complaints received from viewers have been in regard to local coverage or the weather, but there is no mention of the actual numbers of viewership. It needs to be determined whether the complaints are isolated incidents, and the viewership has actually been growing or remaining steady despite the shift toward national affairs, or whether the shift toward national news has occurred during a time when viewership as a whole as dropped. Correlation cannot equal causation, and to say that the complaints for more local coverage has directly led to the drop in advertising venues is an egregious example of correlations equating causation. It may be the case that viewership has remained steady, but that the complaints that have been sent in are from a minority of people that desire more local coverage — if that were the case, then to change an entire business model based on the complaints of a relative minority will not be a sound financial business decision. Evidence would need to be gathered to calculate how often these complaints have been sent into the station, and what size the complaints are proportionally to the viewership of the channel as a whole. Complaints of what is being shown are much more important if they come from 30% of the viewership than if it comes from 3%. If the complaints only come from a small minority of viewers, then this would weaken the argument of the manager; if the complaints are coming from a great majority, this would strengthen the manager's position.

Secondly, data must be acquired that covers the numbers for viewership of television channels as a whole. Are people watching less news because there is only national coverage, and are instead opting for a channel with local coverage, or are people simply not watching news as much anymore? To proceed without understanding the broad scope of how common news-watching is anymore is to put the cart before the horse. If the evidence showed that, for example, less people are watching news as a whole, then shifting from national toward local news will not change the attitude of society as a whole, and this would weaken the argument of the manager greatly. However, if it is shown that the number of nation-wide viewership has stayed constant or grown, then this is something that must be taken into consideration and would strengthen the argument of the manager.

Thirdly, what is the reasoning for the local businesses canceling their advertising contracts with the station? Are they cancelling because less people are watching this specific station, and so it is an ineffective form of advertisement, or are they cancelling because those local businesses have possibly grown to where they no longer need to rely on advertisements to bring in patrons, but have instead become a staple in the area, and survive off word-of-mouth and good reviews alone? What if they are cancelling because fewer people watch the news at all? If the businesses are pulling out of their contracts and entering into new advertising contracts with other forms of media, or even with other news channels, then this would strengthen the manager's argument by showing that the specific television station is not drawing viewers. But if those businesses are choosing not to advertise with television stations at all, or if they are cutting back on contracts with any television station, then that weakens the manager's argument by showing that it is not the fault of the specific station that the advertising contracts are leaving — it is simply the sign of a competitive market in which the businesses recognize that they no longer need the stations at all in order to advertise.

All of these pieces of evidence must be examined in order to determine whether the manager is correct in the statement. Without examining each individual piece of evidence, one will not be able to determine if the drop in advertising contracts is the fault of the individual station as opposed to an effect happening in television stations at large.