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
Answer
When discussing circulation of the newspapers' readers, various aspects need to be taken into consideration in order to form a coherent analysis.
In the passage it is argued by the author that the increased circulation of Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. Support for this claim takes the form, primarily, of an assumption that if the Mercury reduces its price bellow that of The Bugle, it will get more people to read the newspaper. On deeper analysis of the subject at hand, however, it becomes apparent that certain relevant aspects have not been taken into account, leading to a number of flaws.
One such flaw is to assume that Mercury's circulation has declined because Bugle newspaper price is low and the reduce of Mercury papers price will increase the number of readers. The decline of circulation can cause a lot of different things. For example Mercury's circulation might decline as the articles were not interesting, or the news were old and not important for readers. It might be caused by Internet as well. Today more people prefer to get information from Internet, as it is free and fresh.
There is no information about the numbers of Bugle readers. We do not know the number of Bugle readers has been increased during these years or not, or even if it increased what caused the increase. As well there is no information, these two newspapers are in the same aspect or not, who is the audience of these papers. Is there any correlation between these two newspapers?
In order to strengthen the argument, the author should bring more statistic information about the Bugle and the Mercury circulation, about the areas they covered, for what public is published their newspapers.
The author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary, support and render his conclusion unacceptable.
Another statement, significantly weakening the argument, is to assume that Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper by increasing its circulation. The business will buy advertising space not just as the newspaper circulation is high. It depends on what kind of newspaper is that, who is the audience of that newspaper, what area the newspaper covers.
While the author does have several key issues in his argument's premises and assumptions, that is to say that the entire argument is without base. To overcome this flaw, the argument should include more information about the newspapers audience and what kind of business is in that area.
Though there are several issues with the author's reasoning at present, with research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.
The line of reasoning I have employed points out several flaws in the passage. After closer examination of the matter, I conclude that the above argument is not logically sound.
"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
Answer
When discussing circulation of the newspapers' readers, various aspects need to be taken into consideration in order to form a coherent analysis.
In the passage it is argued by the author that the increased circulation of Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. Support for this claim takes the form, primarily, of an assumption that if the Mercury reduces its price bellow that of The Bugle, it will get more people to read the newspaper. On deeper analysis of the subject at hand, however, it becomes apparent that certain relevant aspects have not been taken into account, leading to a number of flaws.
One such flaw is to assume that Mercury's circulation has declined because Bugle newspaper price is low and the reduce of Mercury papers price will increase the number of readers. The decline of circulation can cause a lot of different things. For example Mercury's circulation might decline as the articles were not interesting, or the news were old and not important for readers. It might be caused by Internet as well. Today more people prefer to get information from Internet, as it is free and fresh.
There is no information about the numbers of Bugle readers. We do not know the number of Bugle readers has been increased during these years or not, or even if it increased what caused the increase. As well there is no information, these two newspapers are in the same aspect or not, who is the audience of these papers. Is there any correlation between these two newspapers?
In order to strengthen the argument, the author should bring more statistic information about the Bugle and the Mercury circulation, about the areas they covered, for what public is published their newspapers.
The author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary, support and render his conclusion unacceptable.
Another statement, significantly weakening the argument, is to assume that Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper by increasing its circulation. The business will buy advertising space not just as the newspaper circulation is high. It depends on what kind of newspaper is that, who is the audience of that newspaper, what area the newspaper covers.
While the author does have several key issues in his argument's premises and assumptions, that is to say that the entire argument is without base. To overcome this flaw, the argument should include more information about the newspapers audience and what kind of business is in that area.
Though there are several issues with the author's reasoning at present, with research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.
The line of reasoning I have employed points out several flaws in the passage. After closer examination of the matter, I conclude that the above argument is not logically sound.
