“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.
The memo from the advertising director follows the belief that by spending more on the advertising and promotion of the movie, the number of people watching the Super Screen-produced movies will increase. He concludes this based on the recent report from their marketing department which underlies that there has been a decline in the people watching Super Screen-produced movies as compared to any other year despite the increase in the number of positive reviews for the specified movie. Apparently, by increasing the amount spent on advertising the company can ensure that the prospective viewers can be targeted and be more informed about their movies. The conclusion seems to be fallaciously based on the facts presented and lacks reasonability. Before going ahead with this plan, the Super Screen needs to address some questions about the possible flaws with the conclusion.
To begin with, the question that needs to be addressed is the lack of cogency of the report. The report erroneously bases its conclusion on one reason. It doesn’t effectively relate the decline in the number of people not watching the movies produced by them, instead, it vaguely concludes through the use of ambiguous words and does not evidently support the conclusion using statistics. To avoid such ambiguity, the company could conduct other surveys with coherently elucidated questions which could be used to establish a more concrete relationship between the reasons behind the decline.
Another possible question that requires attention is the total number of people watching movies produced by all the companies. Super Screen would have a comprehensive overview of the current movie market by comparing the number of people attending movies produced by other companies to the ones produced by them. If the number of movie goers is declining as a whole then spending more to promote their own film would not fulfil the purpose of increasing the viewers of the Super Screen produced movies. Instead, they should focus on attracting more viewers to the theatres by underlining the entertainment aspect attached to the experience of movie watching.
Finally, the company needs to check whether the movies produced by them are palatable to the general audience. To elaborate, there is a possibility that the movies produced by them could garner a number of positive reviews but the theatrical nuances of the movie might not be comprehensible to the general audience as compared to the pundit reviewers. If this is the case, then the company could focus more on movies appealing to the sense of the public to attract more number of viewers.
To conclude, before realizing the director’s plan, Super Screen Company should focus on an inclusive analysis of the situation at hand. They should establish a more tangible relationship through comprehensive surveys and analyse other reasons for the decline of the number of movie watchers, instead of concluding based on one reason. They should also check whether the themes of the movies produced by them is in line with the taste of the general audience. By addressing such questions Super Screen Company can increase the number of people watching their movies.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-07 | Venkateshwar | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | Venkateshwar | 23 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | Smrithi B R | 33 | view |
| 2019-11-09 | sampath srini | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-01 | harshalg007 | 42 | view |
- “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 movie 58
- “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 movie 58
- “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 movie 50
- “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 movie 58
- In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes littl 68
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'apparently', 'but', 'finally', 'if', 'so', 'then', 'to begin with']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.254054054054 0.25644967241 99% => OK
Verbs: 0.167567567568 0.15541462614 108% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0612612612613 0.0836205057962 73% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0414414414414 0.0520304965353 80% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0288288288288 0.0272364105082 106% => OK
Prepositions: 0.144144144144 0.125424944231 115% => OK
Participles: 0.0738738738739 0.0416121511921 178% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.82081162354 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0342342342342 0.026700313972 128% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.142342342342 0.113004496875 126% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.027027027027 0.0255425247493 106% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00720720720721 0.0127820249294 56% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3211.0 2731.13054187 118% => OK
No of words: 513.0 446.07635468 115% => OK
Chars per words: 6.25925925926 6.12365571057 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75914943092 4.57801047555 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.413255360624 0.378187486979 109% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.309941520468 0.287650121315 108% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.218323586745 0.208842608468 105% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.138401559454 0.135150697306 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82081162354 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 207.018472906 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.424951267057 0.469332199767 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 48.5568511071 52.1807786196 93% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.039408867 100% => OK
Sentence length: 25.65 23.2022227129 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.6815666685 57.7814097925 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 160.55 141.986410481 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.65 23.2022227129 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.4 0.724660767414 55% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.58251231527 0% => OK
Readability: 56.6441520468 51.9672348444 109% => OK
Elegance: 1.98484848485 1.8405768891 108% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.425537084935 0.441005458295 96% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.176829988111 0.135418324435 131% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0855352749764 0.0829849096947 103% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.678435494187 0.58762219726 115% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.111201317908 0.147661913831 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.210603257332 0.193483328276 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0852134800303 0.0970749176394 88% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.624832317499 0.42659136922 146% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0449569295135 0.0774707102158 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.320806199973 0.312017818177 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0607421324435 0.0698173142475 87% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.33743842365 180% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.87684729064 29% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 14.0 6.46551724138 217% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 5.36822660099 37% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.