Alright, let's imagine you're playing a big game of Monopoly with your friends. In this game, there are different spaces on the board that you can land on, like "Go", "Income Tax", or "Jail".

Now, IBM is like one of those spaces on the Monopoly board in the real-life stock market game. When people talk about IBM's earnings, it's like talking about how much money IBM makes when players land on their space and pay rent.

Goldman Sachs is a big company that watches these games (stock markets) all the time. They have experts who try to guess how well IBM will do in the future, so they can tell other people if they think IBM is a good place to put your money.

So, when Goldman Sachs says they think IBM will do really well and might be worth more money in the future, it's like them saying "Hey, you should buy this Monopoly property because it'll make a lot of money for you later!" But remember, even grown-ups can make mistakes, so it's always good to listen to lots of people and make your own decisions too. Read from source...

Here are some potential ways to criticize or improve the given text from a journalistic perspective:

1. **Bias and Lack of Objectivity:**
- The text favors a particular analyst's (Goldman Sachs' James Schneider) perspective without providing counterarguments or opinions from other analysts.
- It treats Schneider's "buy" recommendation as factual, while in reality, it's just one opinion among many.

2. **Vague Language and Lack of Specifics:**
- The text uses vague phrases like "major upgrades," "changes to the market's most accurate analysts," without defining what exactly constitutes a "major upgrade" or how accuracy is measured.
- It doesn't specify which stocks are being analyzed, making it difficult for readers to understand the context.

3. **Irrational Arguments:**
- The text states that "Trade confidently with insights and alerts from analyst ratings." While analyst ratings can be useful, they don't guarantee trade confidence or success. The author assumes that readers will unquestioningly accept this claim.

4. **Emotional Behavior:**
- The use of phrases like "Join Benzinga Edge and unlock all the major upgrades" could be seen as manipulative, aiming to evoke a fear-of-missing-out (FOMO) emotion in readers.
- There's no mention of potential risks or downsides to following analyst ratings.

5. **Lack of Context and Inconsistencies:**
- The text discusses Benzinga Edge, but it's unclear what this service is and why users should be interested in it.
- It talks about the upcoming Analyst Calendar, but doesn't explain how this calendar might help readers or how it ties into the article's main theme of analyst ratings.

To improve the text:

- Provide a clear, unbiased overview of various analysts' opinions on specific stocks.
- Explain what makes certain analysts more "accurate" than others.
- Discuss both the benefits and limitations of following analyst ratings.
- Clearly define any referenced services (like Benzinga Edge) and explain their relevance to the article's topic.
- Use consistent terminology and provide context where needed.

Based on the provided article, here's a breakdown of its sentiment:

- **Positive**: The article is overall positive as it highlights Goldman Sachs' bullish stance on International Business Machines Corp. (IBM). It discusses the analyst's expectations for IBM's upcoming earnings report and their long-term prospects.
- **Bullish**: The use of terms like "uplift" and mentioning that the analyst believes IBM shares could appreciate implies a bullish sentiment. The analyst's upgrade to 'Buy' further solidifies this bullish outlook.
- **Neutral**: While the article mentions the potential for IBM earnings to miss estimates, it also presents the analyst's view on how IBM is set up for long-term growth. Additionally, it doesn't include any strong negative language or expectations.

In summary, the overall sentiment of the article is positive and bullish regarding International Business Machines Corp., emphasizing the analyst's optimism about its future prospects and earnings potentials.