Argument Topic 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

Following a decline in the number of people visiting the Super Screen-produced movies in the past year, the advertising directory sites the lack of publicity of the current reviews behind this decline. To overcome this drawback, it recommends Super Screen to increase the budget allotted for the coming year. The increase in budget will publicize the positive reviews and eventually attract more poeple. However, the answer for certain vital questions is essential to determine the validity of the claim.

The very first essential thing which the argument lacks is the unquantified data. What was the attendance in the previous few years? It could be that the number has been on a decline since quite some time and that of the past year was the lowest. Also the memo states that only 'specific' Super Screen movies had a positive review. Hence is mandatory for the memo to present the total number of people attending those shows and how many of them had a positive review about the screening. This should also be accompanied by the reviews regarding the other movies which have not been mentioned.

The next vital question which goes unanswered is whether the movies preferred by the people match with those produced by Super Screen? In the past years, it is quite possible that the genre of the movies which people watched has changed, yet Super Screen continues with its old format. If there are a small of people who are preferring the movies produced by Super Screen, then it will be wasteful measure to publicize the positive reviews. Instead the money allocated could be used to carry out a survey regarding the types of movies the people watched and then eventually the production crew must get into an act of producing such movies.

Super screen terms its movies as 'good quality' and instead blames the 'lack of public awareness' for the decline. However, is there any valid proof which will support this claim? If yes then Super screen should mention about and such a report will convince the finance department to allocate a greater share for publicity. Moreover, the prospective viewers will also get attracted towards such advertises and flock the theaters for Super Screen movies.

Thus, the above questions need to be answered to validate the recommendation. However, as of now, the questions remain unanswered and the argument is termed ill-logical. Had the the author taken care to answer the above questions, then the authenticity of the argument wouldn't have fallen flat.