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 advertising director recommends that Super Screen spend more of its budget on advertising next year. The director argues that the company released good movies this past year, but poor public awareness of the quality of its films depressed attendance. However, questionable evidence and unwarranted inferences make the director's case unpersuasive. Various alternate causes for low attendance escape the director's attention, and the director gives little reason to believe that more people should have attended Super Screen movies during the past year.
According to the memo, annual attendance at Super Screen movies hit an all-time low this past year. The director attributes this decline to a lack of advertising, contending that a dip in film quality, the only other explanation the director considers, was not the cause. But the director's analysis is inadequate. Other plausible causes remain unexamined. For example, how many movies did the company release and in how many theaters? Releasing fewer movies or showing the same number of films in fewer theaters could explain having fewer attendees than in previous years. Also, what was the total number of moviegoers for the year? If movie attendance in general plummeted (due, for instance, to a recession), then attendance at the company's movies could have sunk simply because the total number of moviegoers did.
The memo also states that, in the past year, the percentage of positive reviews for specific Super Screen movies rose. The director infers that the public did not know about these reviews, given that the number of attendees fell. This is a specious inference. Assume, as the director seemingly does, that the more positive reviews a movie receives, the more people will go to see it, provided the reviews are advertised sufficiently. Presumably, the percentage the memo cites is, for a given year, equal to the total number of favorable reviews for individual Super Screen movies divided by the total number of positive movie reviews across all films. What were these totals for the past year compared to earlier years? Suppose, for instance, that total positive movie reviews dropped from 1,000 to 500, while the corresponding Super Screen sum fell from 100 to 60. The percentage of positive reviews would have risen from 10% to 12%. Meanwhile, the 40% drop in favorable critiques could have reduced attendance, even if all 60 positive write-ups were well-known to prospective moviegoers.
On the other hand, imagine that both total and percentage positive reviews for specific Super Screen movies increased this past year. Could annual attendance have dropped to its lowest for reasons other than insufficient advertising? Yes, one of the alternate causes already named, such as a sharp decline in total moviegoers, could explain the drop. Another explanation could be that the reviews were well-advertised, but potential viewers did not find them compelling. What did the reviews say? Who were the reviewers? If many of the write-ups offered only generic plaudits, like "fun movie," or weakly positive ratings, such as "3 out of 5 stars," these middling reviews probably would not have been strong attendance drivers. Even if the reviews were often excellent, critiques from top movie critics may have been absent or even unfavorable, potentially depressing attendance.
Attracting and promoting enticing write-ups is important for a film company's success. Whether Super Screen garnered more this past year than in prior years is unclear. Uncertainty likewise surrounds how well the company promoted whatever good reviews its films did receive. Indeed, contrary to what the director argues, too little advertising may not have caused record-low attendance at the company's films this past year. Consequently, the director's recommendation that the company should boost next year's advertising budget remains in doubt.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-06 | Sumaiya Mila | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-06 | Shams Tarek | 46 | view |
| 2020-01-02 | jamaya8 | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-26 | Yongrok_Jeong | 49 | view |
| 2019-12-10 | Opak Pulu | 16 | view |
- It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are generated and preserved.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developin 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 a 66
- It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are generated and preserved.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developin 66
- 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 66
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 407, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...te causes for low attendance escape the directors attention, and the director gives littl...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 281, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...r considers, was not the cause. But the directors analysis is inadequate. Other plausible...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 598, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...y generic plaudits, like 'fun movie,' or weakly positive ratings, such as &a...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 664, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
... ratings, such as '3 out of 5 stars,' these middling reviews probably would ...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 87, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whether” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... important for a film companys success. Whether Super Screen garnered more this past ye...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 442, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...films this past year. Consequently, the directors recommendation that the company should ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, however, if, likewise, may, so, then, well, while, for example, for instance, in general, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3313.0 2260.96107784 147% => OK
No of words: 609.0 441.139720559 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44006568144 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.96768813016 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7476588446 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 283.0 204.123752495 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.464696223317 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 1014.3 705.55239521 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 5.0 0.471057884232 1061% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 34.0 19.7664670659 172% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.0525625626 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.4411764706 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9117647059 23.324526521 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.14705882353 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 8.20758483034 244% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.316498450014 0.218282227539 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0856696712749 0.0743258471296 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0834594101266 0.0701772020484 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202104895693 0.128457276422 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0541167534217 0.0628817314937 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 147.0 98.500998004 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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: 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.