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 from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. He has provided us with the information that the positive reviews from the reviewers have increased in the past year despite the decrese in the number of movie goers. He has concluded that the reason for the decline in the number of people attending the Super Screen-produced movies is a result of the reviews not reaching the public. Consequently, leading him to conclude that he should allocate greater share of budget to advertising. In presenting his argument the advertising director fails to answer some questions, thus leading to doubt the plausibility of his hypothesis.
The memo begins with the mention of a recent report from the marketing department which states that fewer people attended the Super Screen produced movies than any other year. But the director fails to provide any statistics to support this claim. What if the survey was not carried out properly? Even though it was, what is the actual number of people who attended the movies this year and how much decline has occured? Was it substantial enough to think about allocating a greater budget to advertising? Are there any other reasons that could have led to the decline? Like has the entertainment budget increased thereby increasing the rates of the tickets, thus prohibiting people from attending movies?
The director then tells us that the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers has increased. And then he concludes that the contents of reviews are not reaching public. The director director has made an implicit assumption that if the people become cognizant of the positive reviews, it will motivate them to go for movies. So the director should first verify if the reviews are reaching the public. If yes, then there can be definitely some other reasons prohibiting them from reaching the theatres.
Positive reviews also does not necessarily imply that the movies are of extremely good quality, and that there is no scope for improvement.
So the director should have made his memo more persuasive by answering questions about the quality of the report, the information of the awareness of the public about the reviews. Also what factors other than reviews play a role in inspiring the people in going to theatre. Answering them wo
- Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 16
- Strong beliefs prevent people from thinking clearly about issues 16
- While some leaders in government, sports, industry, and other areas attribute their success to a well-developed sense of competition, a society can better prepare its young people for leadership by instilling in them a sense of cooperation 50
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 41
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The argument presents a memo from the ad...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 644, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s to answer some questions, thus leading to doubt the plausibility of his hypothe...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...bt the plausibility of his hypothesis. The memo begins with the mention of a re...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ibiting people from attending movies? The director then tells us that the perc...
^^^^
Line 3, column 186, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: director
...of reviews are not reaching public. The director director has made an implicit assumption that if...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ting them from reaching the theatres. Positive reviews also does not necessari...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...at there is no scope for improvement. So the director should have made his mem...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 186, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...reness of the public about the reviews. Also what factors other than reviews play a ...
^^^^
Line 25, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'consequently', 'first', 'if', 'so', 'then', 'thus']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.247572815534 0.25644967241 97% => OK
Verbs: 0.172330097087 0.15541462614 111% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0485436893204 0.0836205057962 58% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0558252427184 0.0520304965353 107% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0388349514563 0.0272364105082 143% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.140776699029 0.125424944231 112% => OK
Participles: 0.0631067961165 0.0416121511921 152% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.70373081482 2.79052419416 97% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0266990291262 0.026700313972 100% => OK
Particles: 0.00242718446602 0.001811407834 134% => OK
Determiners: 0.150485436893 0.113004496875 133% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0169902912621 0.0255425247493 67% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0169902912621 0.0127820249294 133% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2408.0 2731.13054187 88% => OK
No of words: 384.0 446.07635468 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.27083333333 6.12365571057 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4267276788 4.57801047555 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.388020833333 0.378187486979 103% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.291666666667 0.287650121315 101% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.213541666667 0.208842608468 102% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.119791666667 0.135150697306 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70373081482 2.79052419416 97% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 207.018472906 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.463541666667 0.469332199767 99% => OK
Word variations: 48.9705278054 52.1807786196 94% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 18.2857142857 23.2022227129 79% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.7727102512 57.7814097925 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.666666667 141.986410481 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2857142857 23.2022227129 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.380952380952 0.724660767414 53% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 3.58251231527 251% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 47.4523809524 51.9672348444 91% => OK
Elegance: 1.69090909091 1.8405768891 92% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.563360785423 0.441005458295 128% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.131107023909 0.135418324435 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0947994331497 0.0829849096947 114% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.571268427289 0.58762219726 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.205279939166 0.147661913831 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.226394436236 0.193483328276 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.160526003124 0.0970749176394 165% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.393051470517 0.42659136922 92% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.168454573225 0.0774707102158 217% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.361247059019 0.312017818177 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.15704896619 0.0698173142475 225% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.33743842365 168% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 10.0 6.46551724138 155% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 5.36822660099 37% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.82389162562 71% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => 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.