AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Good Luck
elle089 wrote:
The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:
“Since a competing lower-priced news paper, 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.
The argument claims that the best way to increase circulation of The Mercury is to lower the price of the newspaper, attracting more business to buy advertising space in the newspaper. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors, on basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions, for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore, the argument is rather weak and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that the circulation of The Mercury declined by10,000 readers because of the introduction of the lower-priced The Bulge five years ago. This statement fails to provide any evidence for the correlation between the introduction of the lower-pricednewspapers and the decreasing circulation of the Mercury. There might be other reasons, which could explain the decline five years ago. For example, the Mercury could fire it's best authors. For sure, firing its best authors would affect the quality of articles and, thus, the popularity of the newspaper. Author fails to mention how the landscape of media business has changed. For example, many newspapers have been facing serious financial issues since the introduction of various social media platforms. The argument would have been much clearer if it explicitly gave examples of how the introduction of The Bulge led to decreased circulation of the Mercury.
Second, the argument suggests that the best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price. This is again an unsupported conclusion. There might be other better ways to improve the situation of the Mercury. The author could provide examples of other newspapers, which have achieved the same goal as The Mercury by reducing their prices. Also, the marketing department of the newspaper could suggest some ideas such as promotion, advertising, special offers for subscription. If the argument provided evidence that price reduction leads to better sales, the argument could have been strengthened.
Finally, the argument concludes that the increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more business to buy advertising space in the paper. From this statement again it is not clear how the increased circulation will help to achieve these goals. There are many factors which may influence advertisers' decisions when choosing a newspaper. Some of the major factors could be the audience, geographical coverage, reputation and many others. Without supporting evidence and examples from other newspapers, which could attract new advertisers through increased circulation or improve sales by reduced price, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
The argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. The author has failed to convey any compelling reason for The Mercury to reduce the price in order to improve the circulation and attract advertisers.
Could, you, please evaluate my essay?