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".
In this memo the advertising director of super screen movie production company claims that the reduction in the audience of its over the last year is a cause of lack of marketing. To support his claim, he gives evidence of the reviews of the same movie over the period. Close scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it leads little credibility, which render it unconviencing.
To begin with, the critics whos' review the director relies on are of a specificly well defined age domain. On the other hand the people viewing the movie are from as children to senior citizens. There tastes and preferanes are hard to be determined by just reviews. Declaring the quality on a movie by the reviewer seems to be very superficial. Only if the movie would have gotten bright and conviencing reviews from variety of age groups, proving it to be fit for everyone not just a handful of audience would have made the directors' claim substancial.
Secondly, the director lays his conclusion on the well going of his production on a span of just one year. Basing a judgement after just one year proves the call to be very naive and foolish. Movie are a fickle concept, the have to be given adequate time before reaching to a conclusion. It could be possible that that year the market for the movies produced by Super Screen Movies wasn't affected by marketting but the genres it was targetting. Had the director mentioned that other movies of similar type did better than his movies there would have been logical comparism between the two. Due to the lack of substantial comparism the claim made after a period of just a year seems a idiotic move.
Finally, there is no solid garentee that a better publicity of its movies will boast its ticket sales in the future. There has to be credible source that connect this two or a reliably well defined relation between the same. This argument is like comparing appes with oranges. Had there been some illustration explaining that marketing a movie with higher budget leads to definite increase in its sales this argument would have been reliable and believable.
To sum it all up, the director's claim seems uncertain to me in terms of its validty. To bolster his call he could have given some relevant examples and he could have collected more feedbacks than just obvious onces.
- issue 16
- movies 70
- argument 16
- 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 an 41
- argument 16
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not exactly
argument 3 -- OK
--------------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
----------------------------
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: 20 15
No. of Words: 402 350
No. of Characters: 1872 1500
No. of Different Words: 206 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.478 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.657 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.466 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 125 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 91 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.1 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.632 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.35 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.289 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.519 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.067 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 271, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: Scrutiny
...iews of the same movie over the period. Close scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it leads l...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 28, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: who's
...viencing. To begin with, the critics whos review the director relies on are of a ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 364, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had gotten'?
Suggestion: had gotten
... be very superficial. Only if the movie would have gotten bright and conviencing reviews from var...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 199, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...all to be very naive and foolish. Movie are a fickle concept, the have to be given ...
^^^
Line 5, column 383, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
... movies produced by Super Screen Movies wasnt affected by marketting but the genres i...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 683, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ade after a period of just a year seems a idiotic move. Finally, there is no s...
^
Line 9, column 217, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...more feedbacks than just obvious onces.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, if, second, secondly, so, well, as to, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1915.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 401.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.77556109726 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47492842339 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53748950583 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506234413965 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 605.7 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.6257492043 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.75 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.05 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.25 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221459075264 0.218282227539 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0615858173791 0.0743258471296 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0617507066331 0.0701772020484 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112049474524 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.060064337414 0.0628817314937 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 14.3799401198 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.44 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.