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
The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Prodution Company contends that there in no paucity in the quality of the movies but with the propogation of the positive reviews. That the reviews are not reaching its 'propective viewers' is the underlying problem which could be solved by advertising about the good quality movies through which the awareness of the public reagarding the movies increase, consequently more viewers would attend Super Screen - produced movies. Hence, the advertising director calls for greater share of budget for advertising. Primary inspection this contention might look acceptable but further observation reveals this argument is rife with assumptions and no direct connection in drawing conclusions.
Firstly, we might want to look at the data prior to making any decision. The report that the director mentions reveals no information about which places are looked at. it only suggests that 'fewer people attended' during the "past year". That does not give a clear direction as to what proportion of the region has paucity in the viewership. Region wise data would compel to make the right decision by only focusing on those areas.
Fewer people attended the movies might not suggest that they are not aware of the movies. There are multiple channels through which viewers might watch a movie. The contents of the movie might have reached the viewers via Television, internet, or internet based channels as Netflix ot Amazon Prime, or DVDs. We cannot conclude that contents are not reaching base on the attendace of the viewership. This calls for holistic data of what are the other media through which the viewers watch the movies.
The reviews state that the specific Super screen produced movies got higher percentage of positive reviews. That does not necessarily mean that all the super screen produced movies have good quality content. And the contention that the making these reviews reach their prospective viewers would compel them to attend all their super screen produced movies is an assupmtion that the director has made.
Holistic data generation with the intention of looking where the super screen produced movies lack viewership will definitely give information on hoe much should be allocated for Advertising in the region that lack information. Just by making the positive reviews reach the viewers migh not guarantee increased viewership. Most of the movies might be viewed through other forms of advertising as well such as informal positive reviews by those who have watched it. Defintely, when these assumptions are properly addressed, one could decide how much of the budget should be allocated and for what region.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-07 | Venkateshwar | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | Venkateshwar | 23 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | Smrithi B R | 33 | view |
| 2019-11-09 | sampath srini | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-01 | harshalg007 | 42 | view |
- Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station’s coverage of weat 59
- A Nation Should Require All Of Its Students To Study The Same National Curriculum 75
- 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 a 42
- Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station's coverage of weather and 59
- Company management should conduct routine monitoring of all employee e-mail correspondence. Such monitoring will reduce the waste of resources such as time and system capacity, as well as protect the company from lawsuits. 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Prodution Company contends that there in no paucity in the quality of the movies but with the propogation of the positive reviews.
Error: propogation Suggestion: propagation
Sentence: That the reviews are not reaching its 'propective viewers' is the underlying problem which could be solved by advertising about the good quality movies through which the awareness of the public reagarding the movies increase, consequently more viewers would attend Super Screen - produced movies.
Error: propective Suggestion: protective
Error: reagarding Suggestion: regarding
Sentence: We cannot conclude that contents are not reaching base on the attendace of the viewership.
Error: attendace Suggestion: attendance
Sentence: And the contention that the making these reviews reach their prospective viewers would compel them to attend all their super screen produced movies is an assupmtion that the director has made.
Error: assupmtion Suggestion: assumption
Sentence: Just by making the positive reviews reach the viewers migh not guarantee increased viewership.
Error: migh Suggestion: might
----------------
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not exactly
----------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 427 350
No. of Characters: 2212 1500
No. of Different Words: 201 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.546 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.18 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.511 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 169 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.35 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.26 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.35 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.329 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.551 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.108 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ct connection in drawing conclusions. Firstly, we might want to look at the da...
^^^
Line 5, column 414, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...endace of the viewership. This calls for holistic data of what are the other medi...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, firstly, hence, if, look, so, well, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2294.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 427.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37236533958 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71182279668 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.475409836066 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 690.3 705.55239521 98% => 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: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.3105638894 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.7 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.35 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.8 5.70786347227 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.321347884686 0.218282227539 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101368977342 0.0743258471296 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107998409151 0.0701772020484 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185126795383 0.128457276422 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.107600906861 0.0628817314937 171% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 12.3882235529 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.