The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:“Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way t

The argument that since a competing low-priced newspaper The Bugle was started five years ago, the circulation of The Mercury has gone down by 10,000 reader’s raises some important concerns that must be addressed to substantiate the argument. The statement that follows suggests a possible solution to increase readership, by reducing the price of The Mercury. Further, the argument assumes that this reduction in price will cause an increase in circulation for The Mercury and increase business.

Most conspicuously, the argument assumes the low priced newspaper The Bugle completely responsible for decreased sales which can be partially or even completely incorrect. It can be quite possible that the newspaper The Mercury had started to perform poor even before The Bugle was formed 5 years ago, and the formation of this low priced newspaper just added fuel to the fire of decline in sales.

First, the argument suggests a solution to overcome the problem of reduced readership by reducing the price of the newspaper. This reduction in price will be accompanied by decrease in the quality of the print, because to slash down prices one needs to cut down on quality. This may further catapult the decrease in sales as a result of lost public interest in substandard quality of newspaper.

Second, the argument fails to address the relation between increased circulation and increase in business by advertisement. Increase in business is a result of a strong marketing team; it can be well assumed that the newspaper has a weak marketing force. Increase in sales depends on the sales department, and the author fails to establish a logical link between circulation and business by rendering advertisement space.

In conclusion, the argument leaves out several key issues; it is neither sound nor persuasive. If it included the items discussed above instead of suggesting an absurd solution to a critical problem the argument would have been more through and convincing.