NBC executives

[Silverobama]

Hi.

Are the following two sentences natural? Will native speakers use them?

1) NBC executives are waiting to see how the show fares in the ratings.
2) The workers were distributed based on their special talents.

The source is not known now. It's very likely that they are from Chinese-English websites.

[tedmc]

Things are distributed, not people.

[teechar]

2) The workers were distributed based on their special talents.

I agree with tedmc. Perhaps try something like "allocated" instead.

[Silverobama]

I agree with tedmc. Perhaps try something like "allocated" instead.

1) NBC executives are waiting to see how the show fares in the ratings.
2) The workers were allocated based on their special talents.

Are these two sentences okay now?

[Yankee]

I would prefer "assigned" for people, "allocated" for objects/things.

[Silverobama]

1) NBC executives are waiting to see how the show fares in the ratings.
2) The workers were allocated/assigned based on their special talents.

Are these two whole sentences okay now?

[Yankee]

If you remove "allocated".

[teechar]

Are those two whole sentences okay now?

Yes, they are. And there's nothing wrong with "allocated".

[Silverobama]

Yes, they are. And there's nothing wrong with "allocated".

In order to show my respect to all the teachers here, I wrote down both "allocated" and "assigned".

[Yankee]

Yes, they are. And there's nothing wrong with "allocated".

As I mentioned previously, I prefer "assigned", not that "allocated" is "wrong". From MacMillan:
"to officially give something to someone, or to decide that something can be used for a specific purpose"