Hi everyone,
Very new to AWA. Read the forum and the very helpful stickied threads. Would really appreciate a review from you and some tips.
Note 1: I had a very hard time writing all of this in 30 minutes. I had no time left to reread, although I know this is an important step. I felt very contrived when writing this essay, as if I was too scared to make a mistake by saying something in a way that's not proper by AWA's standards. So any tips on that level would be appreciated.
Note 2: I thought about/forgot to break my third paragraph in 2, in an attempt to have a Intro - 1st - 2nd - 3rd - Conclusion structure.
How important is it to have 2 core paragraphs versus 3? Word Count: 500 words.
PROMPT
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 to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.MY ESSAY with 2 core paragraphs
The author concludes that reducing the price of The Mercury below that of The Bugle will increase readership and restore circulation to former levels. The author's line of reasoning is that the decline in readers is due to the introduction in the market of a new competing lower-priced newspaper named The Bugle. The author then predicts that an increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more business to buy advertising space in the paper. This argument is unconvincing for several reasons. It fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated, and manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. As a result, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First of all, the decline in readership is based upon the questionable assumption that a new competitor, The Bugle, entered the market at a lower price, resulting in a shift by readers from The Mercury to the new newspaper. This is questionable because no information is provided regarding the editorial line of The Bulge or The Mercury. As such, it is unclear whether the two newspapers can reasonably be considered alternative sources of information. Additionally, we don’t know if the two papers are comparable at all. One may be a daily publication, while the other is a weekly or monthly one. Furthermore, a newspaper is typically fairly cheap. Even if the price difference between the two newspapers was of important proportion, it seems unlikely that the monetary incentive would make readers switch from one publication to the other. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated the nature of The Mercury and The Bulge, as well as their respective prices, therefore establishing a clearer comparison.
Second, the increased circulation is predicted to attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. This is again a very weak claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between increased readership and increased advertising revenues. It is possible that businesses are not only looking to advertise in newspaper with high readership, but also consider quality and content as critical. Similarly, no information is given in regard to revenue generated by The Mercury from advertisement prior to the decline. Was there a decline in revenue? How did this affect the journal? If the argument had provided evidence that an increase in readers for The Mercury would in fact attract businesses to spend more money on buying advertising space, then the argument would have been a lot more convincing.
In summary, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is consequently questionable. That being said, the author could remedy this by providing more information about the newspapers in question as well as some insight in regard to what businesses typically look for when buying advertising space in journals. However, on balance, the argument as it stands is not logically sound and remains open to debate.
MY ESSAY (same text) with 3 core paragraphs
The author concludes that reducing the price of The Mercury below that of The Bugle will increase readership and restore circulation to former levels. The author's line of reasoning is that the decline in readers is due to the introduction in the market of a new competing lower-priced newspaper named The Bugle. The author then predicts that an increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more business to buy advertising space in the paper. This argument is unconvincing for several reasons. It fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated, and manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. As a result, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First of all, the decline in readership is based upon the questionable assumption that a new competitor, The Bugle, entered the market at a lower price, resulting in a shift by readers from The Mercury to the new newspaper. This is questionable because no information is provided regarding the editorial line of The Bulge or The Mercury. As such, it is unclear whether the two newspapers can reasonably be considered alternative sources of information. Additionally, we don’t know if the two papers are comparable at all. One may be a daily publication, while the other is a weekly or monthly one. Furthermore, a newspaper is typically fairly cheap. Even if the price difference between the two newspapers was of important proportion, it seems unlikely that the monetary incentive would make readers switch from one publication to the other. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated the nature of The Mercury and The Bulge, as well as their respective prices, therefore establishing a clearer comparison.
Second, the increased circulation is predicted to attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. This is again a very weak claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between increased readership and increased advertising revenues. It is possible that businesses are not only looking to advertise in newspaper with high readership, but also consider quality and content as critical.
Finally, no information is given in regard to revenue generated by The Mercury from advertisement prior to the decline. Was there a decline in revenue? How did this affect the journal? If the argument had provided evidence that an increase in readers for The Mercury would in fact attract businesses to spend more money on buying advertising space, then the argument would have been a lot more convincing.
In summary, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is consequently questionable. That being said, the author could remedy this by providing more information about the newspapers in question as well as some insight in regard to what businesses typically look for when buying advertising space in journals. However, on balance, the argument as it stands is not logically sound and remains open to debate.
close
Updated on: 24 Nov 2017, 20:29
