The argument claims that the decline in number of movie goers of Super Screen movies is due to lack of awareness among people that good quality movies are available and hence Super Screen should allocate a greater share of its budget next to reach public through advertisement and create awareness. Stated in this way, the argument reveals examples of leap of faith, poor reasoning and ill-defined terminology. It fails to mention several key factors, on basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of argument relies on assumptions for which there are no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.
Firstly, it is not certain on how many movies were released last year. Was the number of movies released last year in tantamount to the number of movies released a year prior? As it could occur that, there were less number of movies released last year and hence, fewer number of people have attended super screen movies over a year.
Secondly, the director mentions that the percentage of positive reviews on specific movies increased over the last year. However he fails to account that the number of negative reviews could have also increased on other super screen movies. This altogether could have created a sense of reluctance among movie goers for superscreen movies. Also, it is not mentioned whether the positive reviews received on super screen movies were for the movies released last year. It can very much happen, that the reviews were written for super screen classics released years back which are no longer available in the movie halls.
Thirdly, the director's argument does not answer if there has been an increase in price of tickets for super screen movies. It could happen that, forecasting a good number of people coming to see the movies next year, the price per ticket had been substantially increased for last year. Hence, people would be less inclined to watch Super Screen movies at the movie hall and instead bought DVDs and watched movie at home.
Lastly, the director did not account for the pirated DVDs available in the market for Super Screen Movies. As the awareness of quality movies by Super Screen Movie Production Company increased, the pirated DVDs of super screen movies started circulating in the market much early and hence, people simply downloaded/bought the pirated versions and this reduced the percentage of movie goers over the last year.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and is there unconvincing. Until the above questions are answered, the advertising director's argument to increase the advertising budget and reach out to more public to generate awareness is fallacious.
- 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 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 58
- 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 50
- Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.Write a response in which you discuss the e 50
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the comp 41
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 633, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...argument is weak and has several flaws. Firstly, it is not certain on how many m...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 122, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...ic movies increased over the last year. However he fails to account that the number of ...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'firstly', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'lastly', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'third', 'thirdly', 'in conclusion']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.292089249493 0.25644967241 114% => OK
Verbs: 0.152129817444 0.15541462614 98% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0953346855984 0.0836205057962 114% => OK
Adverbs: 0.052738336714 0.0520304965353 101% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0182555780933 0.0272364105082 67% => OK
Prepositions: 0.133874239351 0.125424944231 107% => OK
Participles: 0.0466531440162 0.0416121511921 112% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.5197933493 2.79052419416 90% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0202839756592 0.026700313972 76% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0892494929006 0.113004496875 79% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0162271805274 0.0255425247493 64% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0101419878296 0.0127820249294 79% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2717.0 2731.13054187 99% => OK
No of words: 446.0 446.07635468 100% => OK
Chars per words: 6.09192825112 6.12365571057 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5955099915 4.57801047555 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.394618834081 0.378187486979 104% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.248878923767 0.287650121315 87% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.165919282511 0.208842608468 79% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0919282511211 0.135150697306 68% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5197933493 2.79052419416 90% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 207.018472906 91% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.421524663677 0.469332199767 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 46.0606180099 52.1807786196 88% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.039408867 100% => OK
Sentence length: 22.3 23.2022227129 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.5173007928 57.7814097925 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.85 141.986410481 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3 23.2022227129 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.65 0.724660767414 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 47.1878923767 51.9672348444 91% => OK
Elegance: 2.11818181818 1.8405768891 115% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.448307893882 0.441005458295 102% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.171056717874 0.135418324435 126% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.107636420308 0.0829849096947 130% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.614821575636 0.58762219726 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.162029035201 0.147661913831 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.195325317501 0.193483328276 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0929357136915 0.0970749176394 96% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.399562670394 0.42659136922 94% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0767584375177 0.0774707102158 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.312077033241 0.312017818177 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0658678940602 0.0698173142475 94% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.33743842365 132% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.87684729064 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.82512315271 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 10.0 6.46551724138 155% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 18.0 14.657635468 123% => 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.