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 that if Super Screen Movie Production Company allocated more of their budget to advertising will increase public awareness and attendance of their movies is flawed. Just because more people may become aware of their movies through their increased advertising does not mean the people will like them or be wiling to watch them in the first place. The lack of a concrete basis for the argument render the advertising director's conclusion invalid.
More significantly, the argument is founded on the assumption that the incease in percentage of positive reviews in the past year correlates to increase in the total positive reviews so far. For one, the reviewers who dislike their movies may have unsubscribed altogether leaving the fewer total number of reviewers to be mostly comprised of fans. Had the argument compared the actual numbers of positive reviewers from the previous years to see if there was truly an increase then, the decline in Super Screen Movie Production Company's movies' viewership would have been surprising.
The argument leaves several other questions unanswered. Despite staing that the quality of their movies was not the problem, the argument omit other relevent factors. What if there was a global or city-wide incident prevent people from attending their movies the previous year - say a pandemic? Even if their was not such event or economic crisis, it is still possible that the people they will be reaching through their ads are already aware of their movies but simply do not like them.
Therefore, the advertising director's argument is illogical. Due to the absence of conclusive evidence, the argument fails to make a convincing case that allocating more of Super Screen Movie Production Company's budget to advertising will increase public awareness and attendance of their movies. The argument would have been compelling if the advertising director had shown that there was an actual increase in numbers of positive reviewers, that people's dislike of their movies was not the issue, or that any other random factor outside the company or people's control was the problem
| 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 following appeared in an article written by Dr Karp an anthropologist Twenty years ago Dr Field a noted anthropologist visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather tha 33
- Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well being of the societies and environments in which they operate Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations provided they operate within the law is to make as mu 58
- 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 Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree wi 50
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 33
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 340 350
No. of Characters: 1757 1500
No. of Different Words: 162 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.294 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.168 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.602 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 102 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 43 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.154 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.766 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.692 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.414 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.414 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.129 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 322, Rule ID: ENTIRELY_COMPRISED_OF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'mostly composed of'?
Suggestion: mostly composed of
...e fewer total number of reviewers to be mostly comprised of fans. Had the argument compared the act...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, so, still, then, therefore, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1779.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 340.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23235294118 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63544521922 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 204.123752495 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.476470588235 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 561.6 705.55239521 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.2189744979 57.8364921388 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.846153846 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1538461538 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.15384615385 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.247053060679 0.218282227539 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1028934755 0.0743258471296 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0791301094713 0.0701772020484 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166924091046 0.128457276422 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.030546558192 0.0628817314937 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.3550499002 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.