Two years ago, radio station WCQP in Rockville decided to increase the number of call-in advice programs that it broadcast; since that time, its share of the radio audience in the Rockville listening area has increased significantly. Given WCQP's recent s

In order to enhance the audience of KICK station in Medway, the station should increase number of call-in advice programs. The conclusion is buttressed by several evidences which should be carefully scrutinized to give a comprehensive estimation of the conclusion's soundness.

The central evidence which is used by the author is that a radio station which is located in Rockville increased the number of call-in advice programs and since then its audience has improved dramatically. However, does this evidence have only one possible explanation? Perhaps we have a deal with a classic case of correlation/causation mistake. The WCQP in Rockville may take some other actions which affect its popularity, for instance, they may fire a well-know professionals to lead the programs or the station may create an effective advertising campaign which made it attractive for local residence. In other words, the probability exists that some other events have led to WCQP's success and the introduction of call-in advice programs is a merely coincidence.

The second evidence which is used by the writer is the result of a nationwide survey which indicates that many radio listeners like the proposed type of programs. Despite the fact that the survey is strong evidence, it has some specific characteristics which limit its usage for the given argument. The nationwide researches give an average representation of the public mood, in other words, this kind of program may be extremely popular in Rockvill and several other towns and be disliked in Medway. The nationwide survey will annihilate the difference due to the nature of the average as a statistical method. The argument could have been stronger had the author given us the result of a survey which was conducted in Medway. Till we have access only to given nationwide study, we cannot use it as a supportive evidence.

Finally, the manager recommends inluding more call-in advice programs in broadcast, however, the facts which are used by the writer is not sufficent. For example, the audience's preferences in Rockville and Medway may be different, these two cities may have differnct public as well, for example, a majority of Medway may consist of the youеh and young adults who like music. On the contrary Rockville may have a big share of senior citizens who prefer to listen to call-in advice programs. Consequently, the author's recommendation is based on unsupported assumptions and evidences.

In conclusion, the recommendation that KICK radio station should repeat the policy of WCQP station is not reasonable due to the fact that WCQP's success may be caused by unstated reasons which were ignored by the writer, moreover, the nationwide survey may not represent the public of Medway, moreover, the extrapolation of the example of success of radio station which is situated in Rockville on KICK is unreasonable due to the fact that similarity of two towns was not proved by the author.