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 success with call-in advice programming, and citing a nationwide survey indicating that many radio listeners are quite interested in such programs, the station manager of KICK in Medway recommends that KICK include more call-in advice programs in an attempt to gain a larger audience share in its listening area.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author claims that the radio station KICK in Medway could attract more crowd by increasing the call-in advice programs. While this sounds plausible and logically correct, the reasoning is rife with loop holes. The author cites the nation-wide survey as well as the success of another radio station, WCQP from Rockville, for reaching the conclusion.
This argument does not provide a cogent reason to increase the call-in programs. Many aspects determine the number of callers of a show. A clearer information about the survey is not presented in the argument. Knowing the population of each town and as well as the proportion of listeners of per program, would give further insight into the scenario. If the population of Medley is much lesser than Rockville, increasing the number of call-in programs will not give the predicted result. A survey of the current listeners’ vs the non-listeners would also make a lot of difference in the conclusion.
Apart from the population, another information that would help is the demography of the region. The shows in Rockville might cater to the majority there. For example, if Rockville has a larger number of teenagers, the radio station will include more shows that feature the current popular musical bands. This will pique the interests of that section and in turn increase the calls. The same example might not be applicable in case of Medley, where the elderly population might be greater.
If we ponder further, accessibility also come into picture. Many people might not have the monetary resources or the time to listen to radio. If Medley is an industry- focused town full of hard working people who do not have the time to invest in a radio show, the listeners will not increase with the programs.
The insight and effectiveness call-in programs and their advices provided by the hosts would also add to its popularity. Furthermore, the popular shows would have accumulated its loyal listeners. It might be difficult for the KICK’s programs to compete with the WCQP’s programs even if in the areas where both radio stations are available.
Lastly, the increase in the popularity of WCPQ’s call-in programs is spanned over two years. A lot of developments could have happened in the two years. People might prefer to use other modes of information, like the internet or newspaper columns for advice.
In conclusion, there is no compelling evidence to support the author’s assumption that increasing the call-in programs would, in turn, increase the popularity of the Radio Station. There are many flaws in the logic considered as it leaves many questions unanswered.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...sing the call-in advice programs. While this sounds plausible and logically correct,...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'furthermore', 'if', 'lastly', 'so', 'well', 'while', 'apart from', 'for example', 'in conclusion', 'as well as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.266260162602 0.25644967241 104% => OK
Verbs: 0.126016260163 0.15541462614 81% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0853658536585 0.0836205057962 102% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0447154471545 0.0520304965353 86% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0121951219512 0.0272364105082 45% => OK
Prepositions: 0.126016260163 0.125424944231 100% => OK
Participles: 0.0284552845528 0.0416121511921 68% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.81422543029 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0182926829268 0.026700313972 69% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.142276422764 0.113004496875 126% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0365853658537 0.0255425247493 143% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00813008130081 0.0127820249294 64% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2650.0 2731.13054187 97% => OK
No of words: 431.0 446.07635468 97% => OK
Chars per words: 6.14849187935 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55637350225 4.57801047555 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.385150812065 0.378187486979 102% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.30626450116 0.287650121315 106% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.208816705336 0.208842608468 100% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.143851508121 0.135150697306 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81422543029 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 207.018472906 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496519721578 0.469332199767 106% => OK
Word variations: 55.5360287343 52.1807786196 106% => OK
How many sentences: 25.0 20.039408867 125% => OK
Sentence length: 17.24 23.2022227129 74% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.0621685427 57.7814097925 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0 141.986410481 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.24 23.2022227129 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.44 0.724660767414 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.14285714286 136% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 47.866450116 51.9672348444 92% => OK
Elegance: 2.3 1.8405768891 125% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.544904629418 0.441005458295 124% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0984225551989 0.135418324435 73% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0881333894483 0.0829849096947 106% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.61433336513 0.58762219726 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.133784939257 0.147661913831 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.228390181864 0.193483328276 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101907895329 0.0970749176394 105% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.432826471649 0.42659136922 101% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0952748562714 0.0774707102158 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.368378451351 0.312017818177 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0506672449348 0.0698173142475 73% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.33743842365 180% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.82512315271 145% => OK
Positive topic words: 15.0 6.46551724138 232% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 5.36822660099 56% => OK
Neutral topic words: 6.0 2.82389162562 212% => OK
Total topic words: 24.0 14.657635468 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.