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 presented argument seems relatively sound at the first glance; a greater number of positive reviews, while lesser number of movie attendees might suggest that people are not aware of the good movies being screened, and hence advertising might sound like a good promotional strategy. However, under closer inspection, it is quite clear that the argument is rather unconvincing; given the obvious fallacies
presented over here.
Firstly, the argument claims that fewer negative reviews among the fewer number of attendees indicate that the movies are of good qualities. This claim is quite fallacious as it is possible that the attendees only consisted of those reviewers with positive responses. Hence, such reviewers cannot be accepted as a true representative of the movie attendees. Their positive responses might not sincerely represent the actual responses of the masses. So, one should not jump into the conclusion that the movies are of superior quality, and the only area that requires improvement is advertising.
Secondly, based on less number of movie screening attendees, the argument claims that people are unaware of the good movies being screened. This argument appears false, especially in today's day and age, where many people prefer enjoying movies at the comfort of their own home. The OTT platforms such as Netflix and Hulu have made it extremely easier for people to access good quality movies inside their own room, without going to the screen. This suggests that despite spending a huge sum of money in advertising, it might not lead people to go for screening, since a majority of the viewers actually prefer watching them at home.
Also, the argument suggests to expend a larger proportion of the budget on advertising. While doing so, the budget for other factors such as cinematography, writing and set designs might not get required budget, which in turn reduces the quality of a movie. Advertising might encourage people to go to the screening, but the negative reviews resulting from such poor quality movies will gather negative response. This ultimately results in low number of attendees for screening.
Overall, the argument is not convincing enough to arrive at the conclusion that more budget in advertising department will guarantee more screening attendees. Much work is needed for the arguer to improve the cogency and logic of the argument. The movie production company requires more plausible data on a sincere review of the movies conducted on such group of people that truly represents the screening attendees. They should also conduct further research to analyze every department and their shortcomings before concluding that the problem lies in advertising department. These improvements will help provide the argument with stronger foundation.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-29 | Eurus Psycho Version | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | riyarmy | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-14 | Saket Choudhary | 68 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | Fahim Shahriar Khan | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Tanvi Sanandiya | 55 | view |
- People often tend to focus on the delivery of a message than the actual content 66
- In any field business politics education government those in power should be required to step down after five years 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Digital technologies for example computers and smartphones have improved the quality of communication between people Use reasons and examples to explain your answer 81
- Online graduate degree programs are being offered worldwide In many respects the programs are like the same degree programs available in a traditional campus environment but in several key aspects they are very different First online degree programs do no 73
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 62
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 440 350
No. of Characters: 2307 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.58 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.243 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.65 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 184 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 134 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.952 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.92 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.312 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.553 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.065 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 8, column 20, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggests expending'.
Suggestion: suggests expending
...ng them at home. Also, the argument suggests to expend a larger proportion of the budget on ad...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, second, secondly, so, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2367.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 440.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37954545455 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57997565096 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74381253576 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513636363636 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 729.9 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.0321068281 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.35 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.45 5.70786347227 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163464849533 0.218282227539 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0500955331029 0.0743258471296 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0552533252362 0.0701772020484 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0767009342766 0.128457276422 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0437890465572 0.0628817314937 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 98.500998004 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.