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 author of the memo, the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company assumes that the publics lack of awareness of good quality movies are available is the sole cause of low reports of people attending Super Screen produced movies. However, this is not true and many questions arise in order to evlauate the integrity of the authors recommendation. These questions include how was the report taken that showed a low attendance at Super Screen productions, as well as the decrease in the number of people in attendance and by how much did the positive reviews increase in the past year.
Firstly, if the number of people in the report that showed fewer people attended Super Screen movies came out to be around two people, this stands to reason that it would not be enough evidence to allocate a greater share of the budget to advertising. This assumption is a sampling error. Also, how and where was the report taken would be a critical question to ask in order to evaluate the author's argument. If the report was taken at an amusement park, where people don't go to watch movies and the availability of movie theaters that show Super Screen produced movies are minuscule the author's argument would be largely skewed to benefit their own argument. People will, of course, say that they have not attended a Super Screen movie because of the fact there is no movie theater around them that shows these movies. In order to fix this author's argument, one can say an increase in advertising is needed to show where these movies are located so that more people can go watch them in their respective movie theaters not because the public lacks awareness of good quality movies are out there. More specifically where these movies are located is more important for this argument.
Secondly, how much did the positive movie reviews increase by is another important question to ask. If the number of positive reviews increased by three percent, this is not a means of increasing the budget for advertising. This number would be too low to show that Super Screen produced movies are of good quality. Also asking which specific movies were these movies reviewed on would be another important question. Including positive reviews for specific movies that does show that all Super Screen produced movies are of high quality. The author may have only chosen specific movies where movie reviewers were positively reviewing the movies. If this were the case the recommendation to increase the advertising budget would be largely skewed. There will of course be an increase in positive movie reviews for those specific movies were of good quality. The bad quality movies would detract moviegoers from seeing these movies because of negative reviews. Thus it is important to find out why there was an increase in positive movie reviews across the board for all Super Screen produced movies not just for specific ones. This would show that all Super Screen movies are of good quality not the specific ones mentioned in the memo.
Finally, by asking the number of people attending Super Screen movies decreased as well by how much as the number of positive reivews increased will t
- 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
- 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 59
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 540 350
No. of Characters: 2611 1500
No. of Different Words: 190 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.821 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.835 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.4 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 202 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 127 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.545 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.843 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.382 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.515 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.153 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 351, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... order to evlauate the integrity of the authors recommendation. These questions include...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 392, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...uestion to ask in order to evaluate the authors argument. If the report was taken at an...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 469, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...aken at an amusement park, where people dont go to watch movies and the availability...
^^^^
Line 5, column 589, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...creen produced movies are minuscule the authors argument would be largely skewed to ben...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1044, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lacks'' or 'lack's'?
Suggestion: lacks'; lack's
...e movie theaters not because the public lacks awareness of good quality movies are ou...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 317, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...en produced movies are of good quality. Also asking which specific movies were these...
^^^^
Line 9, column 647, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” 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.
...s were positively reviewing the movies. If this were the case the recommendation t...
^^
Line 9, column 961, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ese movies because of negative reviews. Thus it is important to find out why there w...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1196, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...er Screen movies are of good quality not the specific ones mentioned in the memo....
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, thus, well, of course, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2660.0 2260.96107784 118% => OK
No of words: 539.0 441.139720559 122% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93506493506 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81833721656 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45016696914 2.78398813304 88% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.365491651206 0.468620217663 78% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 846.0 705.55239521 120% => 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: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.2739300978 57.8364921388 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.909090909 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.72727272727 5.70786347227 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 9.0 5.25449101796 171% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 8.20758483034 207% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.323389339204 0.218282227539 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121925555112 0.0743258471296 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0892245757074 0.0701772020484 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232862617912 0.128457276422 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578133425669 0.0628817314937 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.35 8.32208582834 88% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 12.3882235529 149% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.