The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. "According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising.
The author of the argument is advertising director of a movie production company. In the argument, he/she states that he/she is sure that the content they are developing is good, but due to lack of advertising, they are not able to reach more people, which is the reason for the fall in viewership of their movies. The argument states that the reason behind the less viewership is less advertising.Considering this, the line of reasoning provided by the author is unconvincing and has unsubstantial assumptions and weak evidence.
First of all, the reason behind the fewer people attending is given that company is not doing enough advertising. But there maybe other factors which are affecting their viewership. Like, the content they are producing is not upto the mark for the audience and the audience is not impressed with the content. Maybe they are organizing the screening at far away places outside of the main city, which is leading to unsatisfactory sales. The argument failed to take into account these factors.
Secondly, the author states that the movie reviews of "specific" movies were positive. He did not cover all the movies in his statement, so that may mean the reviews of other productions were not satisfactory and the author is being biased for some reason. They must analyze the content and do a proper research in order to get the people's taste about movies and then work accordingly. The argument did not provide the evidence and reasoning in this aspect as well.
Moreover, the argument states that the despite the fall in viewership, the number of positive reviews increased a lot. That could mean that only the fans of their productions go and watch their movies. If someone likes something already, they tend to give a positive review about it. This does not mean that content they are producing is necessarily good. This concludes that content is just targeted for a specific audience only and explains the fall in sales.
Finally, the author states that if the budget for advertising is increased, that will ensure a better number of viewership and better results overall. There is no strong evidence for that. Maybe the budget sanctioned for the advertising is enough, but they are not using it properly and effectively and are failing to get their product noticed. And even if they are using it effectively, that does not guarantee that increasing budget will ensure better results.
So, the argument lacks evidence and does not provide proper reasoning to prove the claim. The points covered above play an important role in providing reasoning, which is not covered in the argument. The author needs to provide further evidence in order to strengthen his claim.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 399, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Considering
...the less viewership is less advertising.Considering this, the line of reasoning provided by...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 276, Rule ID: THE_NN_AND_THE_NN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'are'?
Suggestion: are
... mark for the audience and the audience is not impressed with the content. Maybe t...
^^
Line 5, column 305, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'proper research'.
Suggestion: proper research
...n. They must analyze the content and do a proper research in order to get the peoples taste about...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['accordingly', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'then', 'well', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.208416833667 0.25644967241 81% => OK
Verbs: 0.196392785571 0.15541462614 126% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0681362725451 0.0836205057962 81% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0721442885772 0.0520304965353 139% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0400801603206 0.0272364105082 147% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.112224448898 0.125424944231 89% => OK
Participles: 0.0521042084168 0.0416121511921 125% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.81976796173 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0200400801603 0.026700313972 75% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.12625250501 0.113004496875 112% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0100200400802 0.0255425247493 39% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0120240480962 0.0127820249294 94% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2717.0 2731.13054187 99% => OK
No of words: 450.0 446.07635468 101% => OK
Chars per words: 6.03777777778 6.12365571057 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6057793516 4.57801047555 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.355555555556 0.378187486979 94% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.253333333333 0.287650121315 88% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.184444444444 0.208842608468 88% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.117777777778 0.135150697306 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81976796173 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 207.018472906 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.46 0.469332199767 98% => OK
Word variations: 51.0574981579 52.1807786196 98% => OK
How many sentences: 24.0 20.039408867 120% => OK
Sentence length: 18.75 23.2022227129 81% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.8901920046 57.7814097925 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.208333333 141.986410481 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.75 23.2022227129 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.541666666667 0.724660767414 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.58251231527 84% => OK
Readability: 44.0833333333 51.9672348444 85% => OK
Elegance: 1.20779220779 1.8405768891 66% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.348322162778 0.441005458295 79% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.12958780169 0.135418324435 96% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.086144748737 0.0829849096947 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.577527671323 0.58762219726 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.154782333813 0.147661913831 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.158590262239 0.193483328276 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0969754919876 0.0970749176394 100% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.440547990831 0.42659136922 103% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.14659181038 0.0774707102158 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253628154949 0.312017818177 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0744461073119 0.0698173142475 107% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.87684729064 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.82512315271 124% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 14.657635468 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.