"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 advertising director of Super Screen Production Company postulated that the Super Screen should allocate a greater share of its budget in advertising to increase the number of viewers. However, the evidence provided by the director are incomplete and based on assumptions which are not sufficient to conclude the theory.
First of all, the director is stating that fewer people attended the Super Screen produced movies the previous years. According to the director, lack of awareness is culpable for this cause. However, it is possible that during that previous year some new better quality of movies was invented. The people would have been more excited to try out the new technology available in the market. Thus, this could explain the drop in the viewers of the Super Screen movies.
Secondly, the director states that percentage of positive reviews increased about specific movies in the past. But the director nowhere states how the circumstances under which these reviews were observed. Also, the director is assuming a specific crowd of movie reviewers represents all the people. It is possible that these reviewers were the employees of the company. Also the director is assuming that if these reviews reached the prospective viewers it would increase the viewership of the movies. It is possible that even after looking at the review the people may feel reluctant.
Thirdly, the director is concluding that allocating the share of budget of advertising would increase ratings. This method may not be feasible as it is possible that people are aware of the Super Screen Movies and advertising about it would be superfluous. Also advertising is not the most beneficial strategy as even after advertisement of certain products, many people are not actually inclined to use it.
Thus to sum up, to increase the viewers of the Super Screen movies, the director should primarily conduct a thorough investigation and find out the root cause for the decline in the numbers. Also the company should consider the environmental factors rather than just considering the reviews of some movie reviewers. And finally, the company should implement feasible solutions which would not put strain on companies' economy.
| 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 |
- Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear. 16
- "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 50
- 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. 50
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas in which the disease is detected.However since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations,we cannot permi 66
- All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If the companies were to listen to their employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 372, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...wers were the employees of the company. Also the director is assuming that if these ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 258, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...ertising about it would be superfluous. Also advertising is not the most beneficial ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 2, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... are not actually inclined to use it. Thus to sum up, to increase the viewers of t...
^^^^
Line 5, column 192, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...t cause for the decline in the numbers. Also the company should consider the environ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 389, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...implement feasible solutions which would not put strain on companies economy.
^^
Line 5, column 409, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'companies'' or 'company's'?
Suggestion: companies'; company's
...olutions which would not put strain on companies economy.
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'third', 'thirdly', 'thus', 'first of all', 'to sum up']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.251295336788 0.25644967241 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.150259067358 0.15541462614 97% => OK
Adjectives: 0.080310880829 0.0836205057962 96% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0673575129534 0.0520304965353 129% => OK
Pronouns: 0.020725388601 0.0272364105082 76% => OK
Prepositions: 0.121761658031 0.125424944231 97% => OK
Participles: 0.0362694300518 0.0416121511921 87% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.70474760215 2.79052419416 97% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0181347150259 0.026700313972 68% => OK
Particles: 0.00777202072539 0.001811407834 429% => OK
Determiners: 0.145077720207 0.113004496875 128% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0310880829016 0.0255425247493 122% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0103626943005 0.0127820249294 81% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2220.0 2731.13054187 81% => OK
No of words: 355.0 446.07635468 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.25352112676 6.12365571057 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.57801047555 95% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.419718309859 0.378187486979 111% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.329577464789 0.287650121315 115% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.250704225352 0.208842608468 120% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.118309859155 0.135150697306 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70474760215 2.79052419416 97% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 207.018472906 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.481690140845 0.469332199767 103% => OK
Word variations: 50.0846239709 52.1807786196 96% => OK
How many sentences: 19.0 20.039408867 95% => OK
Sentence length: 18.6842105263 23.2022227129 81% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.9075654049 57.7814097925 59% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.842105263 141.986410481 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6842105263 23.2022227129 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.894736842105 0.724660767414 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 3.58251231527 167% => OK
Readability: 51.6419570052 51.9672348444 99% => OK
Elegance: 1.71739130435 1.8405768891 93% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.389332325224 0.441005458295 88% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.140392613314 0.135418324435 104% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0707967989797 0.0829849096947 85% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.639203595349 0.58762219726 109% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.114487402501 0.147661913831 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.177874203325 0.193483328276 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0844942309117 0.0970749176394 87% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.464205428476 0.42659136922 109% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.107409388098 0.0774707102158 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.272180071009 0.312017818177 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0581536241627 0.0698173142475 83% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.33743842365 132% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.82512315271 104% => OK
Positive topic words: 11.0 6.46551724138 170% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 5.36822660099 37% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 16.0 14.657635468 109% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
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: This is not the final score. 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.