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 argument provided by the author is having lot of unwarranted assumptions and does not have any authentic evidences to prove each of them.
Primarily, a good movie requires, a lot of efforts in different fields like direction, screenplay, cinimatography and of course advertising the movie could also be part of success to some extent but not as a whole. Here, assumption takes as mere advertisement of the movie would actually qualifies the movies is of good quality, but it is absolutely false because, as I mentioned earlier that quality of a movie depends on lot of other factors but not only on advertising.
Further the assumption provided in the report is based on mere fewer people's review who attended Super Scree-produced movies, which cannot be hold true as there might be only two or three people who reviewed the movie and it certainly cannot hold true for a large sample of public audience, and if there were more number of reviewer's had been attended and reviewed, there could be certainly other side of the movie review would be presented.
And moreover, the assumption on public's lack of awareness on quality movies can be utterly false, as public space is very huge that there can be lot educated people out there in pulic, who can easily judge a movies quality by understanding the pro's and con's of the movie and also most of the people have the capability of analyzing a movie based on their common sense. And there is no proper statistical evidence on public's educational qualification to prove their lack of knowledge to judge a movie.
In the end, as per above reason's, the assumptions provided in the argument has an unwarrented and has lack of authentic evidence, which resulting the argument can be flawed for numerous reason's.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 289, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'qualify'
Suggestion: qualify
...vertisement of the movie would actually qualifies the movies is of good quality, but it i...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 430, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hat quality of a movie depends on lot of other factors but not only on advertisin...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, if, moreover, so, then, of course
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 28.8173652695 28% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1469.0 2260.96107784 65% => OK
No of words: 300.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89666666667 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80573024759 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 204.123752495 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513333333333 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 705.55239521 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 19.7664670659 35% => Need more sentences, or put a space between two sentences.
Sentence length: 42.0 22.8473053892 184% => OK
Sentence length SD: 107.531865235 57.8364921388 186% => OK
Chars per sentence: 209.857142857 119.503703932 176% => OK
Words per sentence: 42.8571428571 23.324526521 184% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.71428571429 5.70786347227 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.141716587991 0.218282227539 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0603569621955 0.0743258471296 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0488540492144 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0675093486974 0.128457276422 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.050515224245 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 23.1 14.3799401198 161% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.85 48.3550499002 60% => It means the essay is relatively harder to read.
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 19.7 12.197005988 162% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.03 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 98.500998004 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 18.8 11.1389221557 169% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 11.9071856287 160% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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: 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.