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 in positive review 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."
In the given argument the author concludes that according to the recent analysis of the marketing department, although but the number of views is decreased, positive ratings of the super screen movie production has been increased. This argument defies simple logic and suffers from several critical fallacies. However, on analyzing from all perspective one can identify the various loopholes and flaws. These flaws are based on vague assumptions and facts that have been presented as evidence in the support of the claim made by the argument.
Firstly, I would like to say that, The backbone of the given argument is although the number of viewers are decreased, the rating of the movies augmented. This fact would seem insignificant to the reader who reads this argument for the first time, but on closer analysis, this fact emerges the weakest link in the argument.
Secondly, the author casts that, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers, hence this problem lies not with the quality of movies but with the public's lack of awareness. however, this argument does not provide any supporting evidence to prove it. so it is clearly seen that the author comes up with this result with only opaque assumptions.
Thirdly, to illustrate it further I have a question that how can the author conclude that it the lack of public awareness without any evidence? It could be a result of the bad quality of the movie. In addition, the author concludes that the Super screen should allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising.
To sum up, in the view of the above, it can be said that the conclusion of the argument sounds unconvincing due to lack of substantial evidence, scilicet, the conclusion is unpersuasive. To bolster it further, the author must give clear concrete evidence, perhaps by way of detailed analysis of reports of the marketing department.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-18 | YO | 37 | view |
| 2020-01-03 | Daffodilia | 59 | view |
| 2019-12-27 | kook | 40 | view |
| 2019-12-11 | sefeliz | 55 | view |
| 2019-12-07 | farhadmoqimi | 58 | view |
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Parkville Daily newspaper."Throughout the country last year, as more and more children below the age of nine participated in youth-league sports, over 40,000 of these young players suffered inju 39
- 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 i 30
- Competition for high grades seriously limits the quality of learning at all levels of education. 50
- The best way for society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by installing in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 50
- shopping is the favorite past time for most of the young people what do you think is that do you think that they should be encouraged to do some more other useful activities 56
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 323 350
No. of Characters: 1578 1500
No. of Different Words: 169 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.239 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.885 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.574 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 119 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 92 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 31 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.917 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.407 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.379 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.645 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.06 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 211, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...but with the publics lack of awareness. however, this argument does not provide any sup...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, in addition, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1635.0 2260.96107784 72% => OK
No of words: 323.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06191950464 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69154763702 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.541795665635 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 705.55239521 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.7906869175 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.785714286 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0714285714 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.21428571429 5.70786347227 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.136169364744 0.218282227539 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0458435914327 0.0743258471296 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621236682147 0.0701772020484 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0711705728347 0.128457276422 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0669055029223 0.0628817314937 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.