GRE Argument 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 period most of

Overall, the reasoning of the memorandum appears to be plausible at the first glance. However, after glancing it carefully, I believe that further evidence is needed to consolidate the credibility of the argument.

Primary, the evidence of the true reasons why the local businesses that used to advertise during the late-night news program canceled their advertising contracts ought to be provided. The fact that the businesses have retreated their advertisement does not indicate that they believe advertising in the television station is not profitable any more, owing to the deduction of the weather and local news broadcast during the late-night news program. They may just change their time of advertising in the television, or they may be just short of funds, failing to afford the advertisement fees. If the situations mentioned above did happen, then the authentic trigger to the businesses’ canceling contracts are not supposed to be the decline in the weather and local news. In this way, the proposed solution may not contribute to the current dilemma.

Moreover, admittedly, the increasing number of complaints on weather and local news broadcast during the late-night news program may indicate a decline in the popularity of the program, owing to the decrease in the weather and local news, but further evidence about the proportion of the people complaining to all audience of the program is needed to strengthen the argument. Manifestly, those who endorse the change will definitely stay silent, instead of writing letters to argue against the people complaining. Hence, if only the opinion of the people complaining has been carefully measured, their opinions will be over-stated. Under such a circumstance, in order to acquire the authentic overview on the feedbacks of the total audience on the change of the program, the station needs the proportion of the people complaining to enhance the plausibility of its argument.

Finally, even though there are two solid facts that the advertisement of the local businesses has declined and that the complaints of the late-night news program focus on the decrease in the weather and local news, the two facts do not necessarily have a cause-and-effect relationship. They may be two results of one cause, or maybe the two facts just happened at the same time. Hence, the evidence standing for the genuine correlation between the two facts ought to be provided, or the assumed cause-and-effect relationship is too fragile to support the argument of the memorandum.

Based on what has been discussed above, the three evidence—the authentic reasons of the local businesses’ canceling their advertising contract, the proportion of the people complaining to the total audience, and the real correlation between the decline in local businesses’ canceling contracts and the current complaints focusing on the decrease in weather and local news—ought to be provided to consolidate the argument.