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.”
The author of this argument states that the problem of fewer people coming this year than previous years to see Super Screen-produced movies lies on lack of public awareness rather than the quality of movies, thus increasing a greater share of budget to advertising will solve the problem. To support this claim, the author cites that there has been an increase in the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers. For several reasons, the evidence provides scant support for the authors claim.
To begin with, the author assumes that cinemas show Super-screen movies at the same rate or time as other movies. Incidentally, it might have happened that cinemas show Super-screen movies only on weekdays and at awkward times such as 12-4pm when people are working. Another case that might happen is that these cinemas show these movies only once in three weeks, which would explain why there are not many people that are attending these movies. Therefore, Super-screen movies simply do not have the chance of being attended by the customers not because of the lack of awareness but because of inconvenient times that they are played. Without considering and ruling out these explanations, the author cannot convince me that there would be an increase in clients with more investment in advertising.
Next, the author fails to consider other possible explanations for the low sales of attendance to Super-Screen production movies. Perhaps because of the high amount of positive reviews the ticket price to see Super-Screen production movies has increased. Therefore, choose to attend other movies simply because they are cheaper and more affordable. Another explanation could be that the only movies that the cinema are playing are the movies that did not get positive reviews. Incidentally, customers do not want to waste their time by watching and paying for it. In any event, the high percentage of positive reviews might have been the driving force of a lack of customers this year compared to other years.
Additionally, in asserting that by increasing advertising it would lead to more customers, the author relies on what might amount to an unfair analogy between the past and current time. A case could be stated that the country is going under recession, with high unemployment rate. Consequently, people do not have extra money to spend on anything other than essential goods. Another case could be stated that there is a pandemic, which states that people could not stay in enclosed and highly populated areas. Since no data has been shown on the amount of people attending other activities, it is presumptuous to think that advertising would solve the obstacles of unemployment and pandemic.
In conclusion, the recommendation is not well supported.To convince me that the proposed restriction would achieve the desired outcome, the author would have to assure me that there the Super-Screen produced movies are played at the same rate as other movies and at convenient times for customers. The author must also provide clear evidence that the ticket price has not increased and movies that received positive reviews are being played. Further information has to be given on the state of the county in order to better evaluate the recommendation.
| 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 chart shows the changes in UK citizens travel aims from 1994 to 1998 along with the bar chart providing data on their preferred routes during the same period 89
- Some people think that robots are important for human s future development Others think that robots have negative effects on society Discuss both views and give your opinion 84
- Many people think that students learn course materials more effectively by taking exams while others think that students learn more effectively by doing other activities like completing projects Which one do you think is more effective 90
- The diagram shows the manufacturing process of bricks Describe the process
- Is it more enjoyable to work only 3 days a week for short hours or to work 5 days a week for longer hours 80
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 531 350
No. of Characters: 2683 1500
No. of Different Words: 227 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.8 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.053 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.651 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 194 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.136 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.26 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.409 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.319 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.519 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.072 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 57, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: To
...he recommendation is not well supported.To convince me that the proposed restricti...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, incidentally, so, therefore, thus, well, as to, in conclusion, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 13.6137724551 176% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2746.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 530.0 441.139720559 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18113207547 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79809637944 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74827626484 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.450943396226 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 847.8 705.55239521 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.2300469662 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.818181818 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0909090909 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.217434418834 0.218282227539 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0694450425978 0.0743258471296 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0593967862141 0.0701772020484 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133013302644 0.128457276422 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0422178132204 0.0628817314937 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.