TV channel cuts its coverage with local news

[Trololo12]

Hi there,

Here is my argument essay. Please tell me which aspects of the essay I should work on more.

“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 the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station’s coverage of weather and local news. In addition, local businesses that used to advertise during our late-night news program have canceled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to our news programs and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should expand our coverage of weather and local news on all our news programs.”

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

According to the author, the TV station need to increase their coverage of the local news and weather forecasts in order not to loose their opportunities to get revenues from advertising and to increase the number of TV channel viewers. The author assumes that the complaints that were made pertaining to the station’s coverage as well as termination of the contracts were due to their cut with certain types of news and weather forecasts. Still, this case demonstrates that the author resorts to unwarranted assumptions and fails to provide sufficient evidence to support his proposal.

First, the author does not clarify what is the nature of viewers’ concerns about the station’s coverage. It might the case that they complain about inaccurate forecasts or biased presentation of local news. Additionally, it might be that people complained not only about the accuracy but about the time when those programs are aired. Many people prefer watching weather forecasts before they leave homes, or they may prefer to watch local news during evening time. Therefore, from the information given by the author, we cannot reason whether an increase in time devoted to local news and weather is justifiable.

Second, the author assumes that they lose their revenues from advertising because businesses realized that the station does not work efficiently enough to boost their business prospects. Yet it should be noted that local businesses that advertised during late-night hours might have launched ads campaigns across different platforms to test their efficiency, which coincided with the station’s cut with local news and weather coverage. It might be that local companies figured out that they can reach their audience through more efficient communication channels compared to TV, and, as a result, they terminated their contracts with the station. Thus, it remains unknown whether author’s assumptions are reasonable to conclude that they need to increase the time for certain programs.

Third, the author claims that an increase in time allocated for weather and local news programs would attract more viewers, presuming that it is the main reason why people watch their channel. However, it is impossible to conclude that based on the evidence he provided. Thus, it is suggested that the author should contemplate the issue more and possibly survey TV’s viewers about their reasons for watching the TV channel.

Although it may be worth reviewing the content of TV station, it is hard to agree with the author that the amount of time covering local news and weather would improve the TV channel’s prospects. It has been proven, therefore, that the author should make more solid foundation for his claim.

[Luschen]

Hi, your structure and arguments are very effective, though once again there were several other factors you could have discussed as well. Besides those points I have made below, another fallacy is the author is proposing expanding weather and local news on “all our news programs”, but his entire argument rests on a discussion of the late-night news program. Even if his argument were valid in this particular case, there is not reason to believe it would apply to news programs broadcast at other times of the day. The last essay had a similar fallacy, so make sure to check if the author is trying to apply something true of a subset to the entire set without justification.

@Trololo12

Hi there,

Here is my argument essay. Please tell me which aspects of the essay I should work on more.

“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 the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station’s coverage of weather and local news. In addition, local businesses that used to advertise during our late-night news program have canceled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to our news programs and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should expand our coverage of weather and local news on all our news programs.”

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

According to the author, the TV station need[s ] to increase their coverage of the local news and weather forecasts in order not to [lose] their opportunities to get revenues {this phrase seems overly convoluted} from advertising and to increase the number of TV channel viewers. The author assumes that the complaints that were made pertaining to the station’s coverage as well as [the] termination of the [advertising] contracts were due to their cut with [of] {or “cut in the amount of”} certain types of news and weather forecasts. Still, this case demonstrates that the author resorts to unwarranted assumptions and fails to provide sufficient evidence to support his proposal.

First, the author does not clarify what is the nature of viewers’ concerns about the station’s coverage. It might the case that they complain about inaccurate forecasts or biased presentation of local news. Additionally, it might be that people complained not only about the accuracy but about the time when those programs are aired. Many people prefer watching weather forecasts before they leave [their] homes, or they may prefer to watch local news during evening time. Therefore, from the information given by the author, we cannot reason whether an increase in time devoted to local news and weather is justifiable. {this is good, but an additional point is that it is not clear if the people complaining even watch the late-night news program. Perhaps they are watching news programs airing during the morning or evening. What would be more valid is if the number of complaints from the late-night news audience has increased.}

Second, the author assumes that they [have lost] lose their revenues from advertising because businesses realized {“perceived” might be better here} that [airing commercial on ]the station does not work efficiently enough to boost their business prospects. Yet it should be noted that local businesses that advertised during [the] late-night hours might have launched [ad] campaigns across different platforms to test their efficiency, which coincided with the station’s cut with local news and weather coverage. It might be that local companies figured out that they can reach their audience through more efficient communication channels compared to TV, and, as a result, they terminated their contracts with the station. Thus, it remains unknown whether [the] author’s assumptions are reasonable to conclude that they need to increase the time for certain programs. {Additional points here are maybe the economy as a whole has slowed down and so companies have been forced to cut down on advertising expenditures. Another point to investigate is the ad sales department of the tv station. Has their been a change in personnel or a focus on selling ads for other programs that might have contributed to this decline? A third point is that the author only mentions ads from local businesses. It is better to consider all advertisers, not just one category. Perhaps ads from nationwide companies have actually increased during the period in question}

Third, the author claims that an increase in time allocated for weather and local news programs would attract more viewers, presuming that it is the main reason why people watch their channel. However, it is impossible to conclude that based on the evidence he provided. Thus, it is suggested that the author should contemplate the issue more and possibly survey TV’s viewers about their reasons for watching the TV channel. {this paragraph is a little weaker, I think this would be a good place to add what I think is a major invalid assumption of the author. The author is assuming that an increase in complaints indicates a reduction in viewership. In fact, the very opposite might be the case. If 1% of the viewers write complaints, an increase in viewership would actually lead to an increase in complaints. Or take the extreme case where nobody watches your program at all. In that case there would be no complaints about the program! In any case, focusing on a scientific survey of viewers to calculate a program’s ratings would be much more accurate than relying on the number of complaints.}

Although it may be worth reviewing the content [broadcast by the] TV station, it is hard to agree with the author that the [increasing the] amount of time [spent] covering local news and weather would improve the TV channel’s prospects. It has been proven, therefore, that the author should make more solid foundation for his claim.