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."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
It might seem logical, at first glance, to agree with the author's view that the best way to increase the the number of attendance in Super Scree-produces movies is allocating greater share more budget for advertising. However, the author's argument suffers from fundamental weaknesses leading to make a fallacious conclusion.
First of all, the author mentioned that according to a recent report Super Scree movies had fewer audience during the past year, yet having more percentage of positive reviews. However, there is no mention of what was the basis of that reports and who did the repoters ask? For example, the report may be gathered in a cities with less inhabitants or cities that people do not like Suer Screen movies. So the author should answer the question that what cities and countries was the report based on? Furthermore, we cannot accept the authors/report claim, " more positive reviews" because there are no information about the way that they have collect viewers' opinions and reviews. For instance, what if they only ask people whom are happy after the movie? Maybe most of the poeple left the movei theatre and movie in the middle of the movie due to their dissatisfaction, so does this report include their opinions? Without answering these qeustions we cannot accept that the report pefectly shows the societie's and people's opinion about Super Scree movies.
Secondly, even if the report was not fallacious, we cannot conclude that it was due to the public awareness. Author has not mentioned of the time playing the movie, and there is no information that why poeple did not attend the Super Screen-produced movies. Maybe the time of showing the movie was in the middle of the week and at an inappropirate time, or maybe the price of the movie was too high so not many poeple could afford that. Therefore, without having any information about why poeple did not attend the movie we cannot fully verify the argument that it was due to the poeple's unawareness. Author should provide some information and statistics that what percentage of people who did not attend the movie did not know about it.
In order to fully evaluate this article, we would also need to learn more about the previous year's adviertisments. Author concluded that Super Screen should allocate a greater budget for their advertisement based on an unstated assumption that last year's advertisement was not enough. However, advertisement may not have a good quality, or it my be on bilboards that not so many poeple would see. So, the author should answer the question that How much they have spent on advertisement last year and how many people had seen their advertisement? Was the advertisement only bilboard advertisement? Or the advertised the movie using TV commercials. Maybe the did not advertised Super Screen movies efficiently and using the same amount of budget they could expoit better and more reachable advertisement, attracting more audiences.
To recapitulate, despite the argument suffers from several problems and is unconvincing, we cannot absolutely rely on it or refuse it without perusing any additional assumptions and reasoning. The author can strengthen his assertion by Asnwering to the the mentioned questions. Without these changes, the argument is implausible and the reasoning is faulty.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 542 350
No. of Characters: 2720 1500
No. of Different Words: 243 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.825 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.018 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.73 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 199 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 92 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.68 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.562 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.297 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.504 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.133 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
The article provides me with…
The article provides me with a great deal of knowledge, helping me expand my knowledge. You can access: terraria
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 102, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...hors view that the best way to increase the the number of attendance in Super Scree-pro...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 102, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...hors view that the best way to increase the the number of attendance in Super Scree-pro...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 232, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...re budget for advertising. However, the authors argument suffers from fundamental weakn...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 318, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a city' or simply 'cities'?
Suggestion: a city; cities
... example, the report may be gathered in a cities with less inhabitants or cities that pe...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 332, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun inhabitants is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...report may be gathered in a cities with less inhabitants or cities that people do no...
^^^^
Line 15, column 250, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
...sed on an unstated assumption that last years advertisement was not enough. However, ...
^^^^^
Line 15, column 344, Rule ID: MY_BE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'may be' or 'might be'?
Suggestion: may be; might be
...ment may not have a good quality, or it my be on bilboards that not so many poeple wo...
^^^^^
Line 19, column 250, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...trengthen his assertion by Asnwering to the the mentioned questions. Without these chan...
^^^^^^^
Line 19, column 250, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...trengthen his assertion by Asnwering to the the mentioned questions. Without these chan...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, as to, for example, for instance, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2802.0 2260.96107784 124% => OK
No of words: 542.0 441.139720559 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16974169742 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82502781895 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86317914712 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455719557196 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 858.6 705.55239521 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.2006371637 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.08 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.68 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.16 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.25449101796 171% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.243788374773 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0697703238412 0.0743258471296 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0505486934035 0.0701772020484 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127101900994 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0485755903853 0.0628817314937 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: 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.