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.
In this argument, the author claims that the Super Screen Movie Production Company have to spend money through advertising to public. There seems to some validity at first glance. However, we immediately found out several logical mistakes throughout the whole article. My reasons can be substantiated by the incomming comments:
To begin with, the author says that the recent report indicated that fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. However, what if lots of people tend to watch movie through their computer or DVD? Nowadays, lots of people are busy with their work, so they do not have enough time to attend theater. People use their computer to visit some website to buy lots of movies so they do not have to go outside. It is possible that people still watch movies produced by Super Screen Movie Production Company.
Moreover, the author claims that lots of reviews from people are not reaching enough of their prospective viewers. However, what if these reviews addressed those movies perfectly? Positive reviews increased just because that the movies are worth it. People just wrote down their true feelings.
The author suggests that the company should share of their budget next year to reaching the public through advertising to make people be aware that movies of good quality. Nevertheless, more advertisement cannot make people be aware about the quality of movies. For instance, If people do not watch the whole movie, we cannot understand what the perspective addressed by the movie, and they cannot write the best review.
To sum up, the author have to answer these questions to make valid argument he provided. Without such answers, we cannot jump to the conclusion that the company have to share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-18 | YO | 37 | view |
| 2020-01-03 | Daffodilia | 59 | view |
| 2019-12-27 | kook | 40 | view |
| 2019-12-11 | sefeliz | 55 | view |
| 2019-12-07 | farhadmoqimi | 58 | view |
- "a nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college." 50
- The following appeared as part of the Dean’s newsletter:"The University of Wabash is considering a community service requirement for all undergraduate and graduate students. We believe that the objective of any university is to produce well-rounded 59
- Most homes in the northeastern United States where winters are typically cold have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating Last heating season that region experienced 90 days with below normal temperatures and climate forecasters predict th 78
- The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority. 50
- The following is a recommendation from the Board of Directors of Monarch Books.We recommend that Monarch Books open a café in its store. Monarch, having been in business at the same location for more than twenty years, has a large customer base because i 50
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: 17 15
No. of Words: 299 350
No. of Characters: 1486 1500
No. of Different Words: 155 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.158 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.97 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.418 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 113 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 69 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 42 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 22 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.588 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.927 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.647 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.34 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.583 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.142 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, so, still, for instance, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.6327345309 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1542.0 2260.96107784 68% => OK
No of words: 299.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15719063545 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50833444802 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 204.123752495 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.52508361204 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 461.7 705.55239521 65% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.7885766652 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.7058823529 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5882352941 23.324526521 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.47058823529 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.255166088453 0.218282227539 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.084263458276 0.0743258471296 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0982458302824 0.0701772020484 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122002063319 0.128457276422 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.091816650333 0.0628817314937 146% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.3550499002 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.197005988 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.6 8.32208582834 91% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 98.500998004 60% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.