argu 18

桌子上的梨

In this passage, the manager concludes that in order to attract more viewers and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, the station should expand their coverage of weather and local news on all the news programs. To justify this argument, he cites after increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news, most of the complaints received were concerned with the weather and local news. Meanwhile, he points out the local business have canceled contract during this time. Granted that it seems to be somewhat appealing, the argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions which render it unconvincing as it stands.


Firstly, the author presumes that the complaints are about the less time on weather and local news in late-night news program. But he fails to consider and rule out other possible explanations. There is equally possible that the complaints are about other time reports. Or the complaints are concerned about the program quality, the report focus or the host style rather the time. Unless the author can demonstrate that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely, the conclusion is open to doubt.


Secondly, the arguer arrives at the conclusion that the local businesses have canceled contract due to the change. However, he fails to prove that this is the case. Perhaps the macro-economic environment is unfavorable so the advertising budget is cut, or perhaps after the last season's adverting, the company has already fulfill their goals so there is no need to further the advertise. Lacking more specific information about the reason why they canceled, it is impossible to make a reliable argument or a strong recommendation.


In addition to these serious problems, even if all the foregoing assumptions are justified, the presenter just simply assumes that the station should expand their coverage of weather and local news to all the news programs, and neither any anecdotal evidence nor any scientific evidence is provided to prove it. There is every possible that the viewer do not like this plan, after all the change in weather and local new is limited and there is no need to watch the same report all the time. Or although the most complaints are willing to expand the time about weather and local news report, the total amount of complains is so small that it can’t typify the viewers in all. Any of these scenarios, if true, will cast considerable doubts on the presenter's argument.


In sum, the author fails to provide a sound argument in favor of the recommendation. To bolster it he should show--perhaps by a local survey-- that the listener will enjoy the weather and local news on all the news programs. In addition, he can strengthen the argument by providing the complaints are focus on the change of less time to weather and local news. In order to better assess the argument, I would need to know more details about why the businesses canceled their contracts.

竹林中人

明早再改

竹林中人

after increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news？
further the advertise？
这篇文章，语法错误少了不少，继续努力，段内内容，还需要提醒下我前一篇的意见