Argument Topic: "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 memorandum, the author suggests to allocate a greater share of budget for advertisement. To support this suggestion, the author states, the number of viewers are decreasing over time and hence, advertisement would help to approach more people. However, this suggestion by the author relies on several assumptions and flawed statements. And it seems unwise and unconvincing to me as it stands, albeit it may seem plausible at cursory glance.
To begin with, the author states that fewer people are attending Super Screen-produced movies, Of which most of them are giving positive reviews. This means that, the people who are interested in Super Screen-produced movies are watching it. Which also implies that there are only a few fans of these movies. Whereas the author assumes that the reason behind the decrease in viewers is due to lack of publicity. The author in this a case must first survey the people and get the actual data of what are the actual statistics of people interested in the movies.
In addition to this, the author assumes that the contents of the reviewers are not reaching enough viewers. The author further gives no evidence to support this claim made by him. The author should provide actual data and numbers related to the claim. There is a possibility that the prospective viewers are getting enough good reviews, but, are not really interested in the content made by the company.
Lastly, the author says, the problem lies with the publics lack of awareness that good quality movies are available. Here, the author fails to provide data related to the quality of the content provided by the company. Is the content really of good quality? For example, some content which might be liked by my friend, would not necessarily be of my liking. The phrase 'good quality' is subjective. Something approved by some person might just not be approved by me, as every human being has their own views and perspectives.
To conclude, the author seems in a hurry to get to the conclusion based on a series of problematic assumptions. To strengthen the argument, more information and investigation is needed. Without having much of evidence related to the assumptions made by the author, it would be unwise to allocate greater budget for advertisement.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 379 350
No. of Characters: 1846 1500
No. of Different Words: 179 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.412 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.871 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.667 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 91 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 52 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.227 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.648 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.545 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.31 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.525 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.087 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 32, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggests allocating'.
Suggestion: suggests allocating
In this memorandum, the author suggests to allocate a greater share of budget for advertise...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 243, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...Screen-produced movies are watching it. Which also implies that there are only a few ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 310, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...re are only a few fans of these movies. Whereas the author assumes that the reason behi...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 183, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o provide data related to the quality of the content provided by the company. Is ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, lastly, may, really, so, then, whereas, for example, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1905.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 379.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02638522427 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76517402163 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.490765171504 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.0966840615 57.8364921388 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 86.5909090909 119.503703932 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2272727273 23.324526521 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.13636363636 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
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: 0.0754222802858 0.218282227539 35% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0240627536996 0.0743258471296 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0569131775966 0.0701772020484 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0408831794421 0.128457276422 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0628527726297 0.0628817314937 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 98.500998004 90% => OK
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?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.