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

Essay topics:

"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.

In the memo, the director of the Super Screen Movie Production argues that the company should increase a share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising. The author supplements his argument based on the assumption that the conclusion based on the recent report should remain valid in the long run and that the public's lack of awareness of their movies is the problem. The argument seems convincing at first glance; however, the unanswered questions lead readers to conclude that the argument is flawed on many grounds.
To begin with, the director needs to answer the question whether the survey result that reports the decrease of the attendants remain valid in the long run. This is due to the fact that the survey was done only during the past year, and consequently that the result might simply be an abberation. It is plausible, for example, that the last year's decrease of the attendants could be caused by adverse economy. Therefore, the author should provide more information about the prospective long-term tendency of the number of customers.
In addition, the author should supplement his argument with more cogent answer to the question whether the increase of the positive reviewers indicate the high quality of the company's films. As evinced in the memo, the number of customers is dropped last year. Therefore, in all likelihood, it could be that the reviews are more positively biased, since only those who care little about the quality of films might have chosen to remain as a customer. Therefore, the author should add more information on the public perspective on the quality of the film.
Furthermore, more answers are needed to the question whether the public are not aware of the company's film. It is plausible that the notoriety of the company's film is the reason of the decreased number of the customers. If this is the case, it is the quality of the film, not the lack of awareness, that causes the problem to the company. Therefore, the author should add more answers to whether the company's film is not advertised enough.
In brief, the author's argument is not convincing on many aspects. Therefore, the author should bolster his argument by providing more information on the long-term validity of the survey result, the reliability of the positive comments, and the grounds of neglecting the possibility that the company's film is already advertised well.

Votes
Average: 5.8 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
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
Essay Categories
Essays by user Jonginn :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 45, Rule ID: WHETHER[5]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "the question"?
Suggestion: whether
...egin with, the director needs to answer the question whether the survey result that reports the decr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 83, Rule ID: WHETHER[5]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "the question"?
Suggestion: whether
...his argument with more cogent answer to the question whether the increase of the positive reviewers ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 41, Rule ID: WHETHER[5]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "the question"?
Suggestion: whether
...Furthermore, more answers are needed to the question whether the public are not aware of the company...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 15, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...s not advertised enough. In brief, the authors argument is not convincing on many aspe...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, well, for example, in addition, in brief, to begin with

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2012.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 401.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0174563591 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47492842339 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65327986283 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.438902743142 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 622.8 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.4839982531 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.352941176 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5882352941 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.88235294118 5.70786347227 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.110998341381 0.218282227539 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0405301231456 0.0743258471296 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0558496665304 0.0701772020484 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0665234763339 0.128457276422 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0512809243667 0.0628817314937 82% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 401 350
No. of Characters: 1972 1500
No. of Different Words: 168 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.475 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.918 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.585 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 107 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.588 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.11 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.765 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.399 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.399 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.123 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5