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.
The argument presents a memo written by the advertising director of the Super screen Movei Prouction Company on the need for a greater share of its yearly budget to be allocated for public advertisement, so as to improve public awareness and participation in watching the company's movies. The director asserts that, the low turn out of people attending super screen-produced movies during the year as compared to the previous years is as a result of lack of public awareness due to funding, and not as a result of the quality of the content of the company's movies.
The arguments could not explicitly state the direct relationship between the lack of awareness and the number of people having interest in patronizing the company's product. It also did not provide a detail statistics of the number of people that attend to super screen produced movies in this year, such that it can be compared with the figures of the previous years.
Another factor that the director asserts is that Super screen movies are high quality movies as such the low patronage is never as a result of substandard movies, or outdated movies but basically as a result of lack of awareness. If there is a proper evidence showing the comparison between the standard and quality of movies produced by the company and other company depicting how Super Screen produced movies are rated ahead of the others, then one might be more convinced that the lack of patronage is significantly not as a result of the movies quality, but there is still no clear or supporting evidence to that claim.
Also, the percentage of the greater share of the budget suggested to be allocated is not clearly stated in the memo. If these factors and evidence are considered then, a more lucid case will be put forward, convincing the investors and company managers to allocate more funds to the advertising department of the Company.
| 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 fields is 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 50
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: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 8 15
No. of Words: 321 350
No. of Characters: 1543 1500
No. of Different Words: 143 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.233 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.807 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.714 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 124 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 84 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 57 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 40.125 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.941 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.875 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.495 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.762 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.147 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 205, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
... be allocated for public advertisement, so as to improve public awareness and participat...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...f the content of the companys movies. The arguments could not explicitly state th...
^^^
Line 4, column 57, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggested being'.
Suggestion: suggested being
...tage of the greater share of the budget suggested to be allocated is not clearly stated in the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, still, then, as to, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 28.8173652695 42% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1564.0 2260.96107784 69% => OK
No of words: 321.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.8722741433 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73896447908 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 204.123752495 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.461059190031 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 505.8 705.55239521 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 19.7664670659 40% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 40.0 22.8473053892 175% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 79.1919148335 57.8364921388 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 195.5 119.503703932 164% => OK
Words per sentence: 40.125 23.324526521 172% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 5.70786347227 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.300218368696 0.218282227539 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136269813594 0.0743258471296 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0751644630783 0.0701772020484 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.178829163772 0.128457276422 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0765053400446 0.0628817314937 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.6 14.3799401198 150% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.88 48.3550499002 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 18.9 12.197005988 155% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.85 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.31 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 12.3882235529 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 18.0 11.1389221557 162% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.