85. This article concludes that businesses using commercial television to promote
1 l( w* [' {/ a0 Q8 X8 t1 u* Otheir products will achieve the greatest advertising success by sponsoring only highly-
+ o' V3 L0 s! b/ a- drated programs—preferably, programs resembling the highly-rated non-commercial
0 o# A% ~: E+ q8 B6 g. wprograms on public channels. Supporting this claim is a recent study indicating that
6 c2 b1 s0 P8 y) H* u# t9 H$ ^many programs judged by viewers to be high in quality appeared on noncommercial ; T( S/ X# i$ B- e( l% `( V/ T
networks, and that the most popular shows on commercial television are typically # D3 P9 h: A8 ?8 ~8 L! @
sponsored by the best-selling products. This argument is weak because it depends on ! l, _( ?$ Q) _0 L6 W* d4 N; v
three questionable assumptions.8 N+ S% k9 Y" C# s) V3 s
The first of these assumptions is that non-commercial public television programs
+ Z2 A' ~# _, G# mjudged by viewers to be high in quality are also popular. However, the study cited by the ( ^* m* d! n7 z: r
author concerns viewer attitudes about the "high quality" of programs on * l+ X9 p4 N; d$ r; f! v8 f+ T+ A
noncommercial public television, not about their popularity. A program might rate
* I# M3 B$ U* I) Y9 Khighly as to quality but not in terms of popularity. Thus, the author unfairly assumes that % F0 ^- r) ]/ r. N$ I
highly-rated public television programs are necessarily widely viewed, or popular.8 R; _! O5 y/ f9 c. w% W
The argument also assumes that programs resembling popular non-commercial 8 A8 F, N4 q% l+ t
programs will also be popular on commercial television. However, the audiences for the
% G- m& y& K# V) W6 }( e- W rtwo types of programs differ significantly in their tastes. For example, a symphony . p0 y) B* I# ?: B
series may be popular on public television but not as a prime-time network show,
! p9 Z& _2 @; j( Abecause public-television viewers tend to be more interested than commercial-television
" J' }1 d9 E2 j9 r$ cviewers in the arts and higher culture. Thus, a popular program in one venue may be 1 @' I) L4 q1 y" j
decidedly unpopular in the other.
. {$ d0 n1 f. u- t8 C2 Z3 R A third assumption is that products become best-sellers as a result of their being + S" V+ f4 i3 C; }4 d/ B f
advertised on popular programs. While this may be true in some cases, it is equally - ]* w3 D" \9 k" _3 z: T
possible that only companies with products that are already best-sellers can afford the ; N! c/ q. a( J: y# R: B" t! J& m
higher ad rates that popular shows demand. Accordingly, a lesser-known product from a
( v5 @5 q- l9 |, mcompany on a smaller budget might be better off running repeated but less expensive—3 Q1 B& T1 y( d p8 w
ads on less popular shows than by running just one or two costly ads on a top-rated
9 y( ?9 C& ~) a8 Y I% d2 `" zshow.
: x/ T0 `; C( { In conclusion, the results of the cited study do not support the author s conclusion. + M& Q0 P, q; e1 e
To better evaluate the argument, we need to know the intended meaning of the phrase
% L1 L! `' |6 N$ w( H& a% ^"highly-rated." To strengthen the argument, the author must limit his conclusion by : `$ g$ N+ e% p/ ~
acknowledging that popularity in public television might not translate to popularity in + D7 `; r% i3 \" U- d
commercial television, and that the best advertising strategy for companies with best-9 w' U& }8 O, u0 C8 Z4 q& v7 W
selling products may not be feasible for other businesses. |
发表于 2012-8-15 21:50:16
