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 roble 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 this production company avers that increasing the budget allocation for advertisement will solve the problem of attendance in the Super Screen-produced movies is faulty as it lacks substantial evidence to bolster his argument. The argument is unconvincing and would need to provide answers to these questions in order to ascertain its credibility.
Firstly, Does the author put in consideration the former budget allocated for advertising, how it has been spent? and what method of advertisement has the department been employing in previous years? Perhaps, there has been mismanagement in the usual budget for advertisement, and an increment might not have a promising effect as desire. Perhaps, the advertising company being patronized by this company is losing its relevance and attention before the populous. It is possible that the issue with the attendance is not related with the financial allocation but with advertisement quality. If either of these scenarios were true, the author's conclusion cannot be fruitful and would need to be re-evaluted. The author might have probably looked into the advertisement department of the company and effect some strategic changes before making such a hasty conclusion.
Secondly, The assumption of the author to rely on the singular report of the marketing department is questionable. Does the director also critically consider the report being submitted? The author seems not to include the reasons why there was decrease in the attendance of the peope that attended the movies. The author assumption that the decline is based as result of poor advertisement is unfounded. It is possible that the people who previously attended these movies being produced have moved to a different location far from the company. Perhaps, after considering the cost implication to attend the company event, they choose to be thrifty. If any of these scenarios were true, then the director might need to re-evaluate his decision about the budget.
Lastly, Does the director also consider the financial status of the company before making a conclusion that is baseless on unfounded evidences? Perhaps, the financial state of the company at this time of decision is not buoyant enough. Even if the decline in the attendance has truly been a result of poor quality to public awareness, the decision to allocate a greater share of the Super Screen budget is not solely dependent on him. The company might have to put in check different factor and be sure that such a step would yield an expected result. Likewise, they might want to also seek consent and support from their support if they have financial crises.
Although, the conclusion of the author might hold water if had not overlooked the critical questions asked above. To strengthen this argument, the advertising director might have to provide substantiate this argument with the suggestions listed below, by conducting an internal survey within the advertising department on how best to improve their output, investigate and ascertain the reason for decline in the attendance and also enquire about the financial pulse of the company. However, as it stands, the decision of the author to increase the budget allocation for advertisement is questionable and unpersuasive.
| 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 |
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other field s by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 66
- 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 ot 53
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 520 350
No. of Characters: 2719 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.775 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.229 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.895 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 210 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 157 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 119 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 81 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.609 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.211 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.522 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.492 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.072 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n order to ascertain its credibility. Firstly, Does the author put in consider...
^^^
Line 3, column 115, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...for advertising, how it has been spent? and what method of advertisement has the de...
^^^
Line 3, column 636, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ither of these scenarios were true, the authors conclusion cannot be fruitful and would...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, likewise, look, second, secondly, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 34.0 16.3942115768 207% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2780.0 2260.96107784 123% => OK
No of words: 520.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34615384615 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77530192783 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96827156687 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.444230769231 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 873.0 705.55239521 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.5875743587 57.8364921388 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.833333333 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6666666667 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.75 5.70786347227 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.195654095524 0.218282227539 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.054104069074 0.0743258471296 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0551272370222 0.0701772020484 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120135503489 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0537109778501 0.0628817314937 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 98.500998004 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.