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.
In the memo, the advertising director of Super Screen Movie Production Company, concludes that the company should allocate a greater share of the budget next year to the advertisement of their movies to the public. This conclusion is however based on unsubstantiated assumptions that dramatically decrease its persuasiveness. Therefore, in order to make an informed decision, the following three questions need to be addressed.
Firstly, what evidence is there that validates the conclusion that the decrease in the number of attendance at Super Screen- produced movies was because of lack of awareness about the availability of good quality movies? The director, without evidence, presumes that the decrease in attendance at their company-produced movie is because of a lack of awareness among the public about its existence. It is probable that the public attended to movies produced by other companies as they aligned better with their interests. It is also possible that the price of the tickets for Super Screen-produced movies increased that year and went out of budget for the majority of movie-goers. Hence, without concrete evidence, the statement cannot be used to back up the director's recommendation.
Secondly, how was the increase in the number of positive reviews calculated? The director never mentions the absolute increase or the percent increase in the number of positive reviews. It is possible that in previous years, very few people gave positive reviews and a 1 % increase in that number is negligible and shouldn't be considered as validation for the director's conclusion. Additionally, it is possible that even though there is an increase in the number of positive reviews, there is also an increase in the number of negative reviews that is unaccounted for in the director's conclusion. Hence, without comparing the company's movie performance analytically with that of others', and producing a detailed comparison chart, one shouldn't base major decision making simply an increase in the number of positive reviews.
Thirdly, what evidence does the director have that increased advertisements will resolve the problem of decreased attendance? It is possible that the increase in advertisement cost outweighs the cost of fewer people attending the movies. There is no proof provided to provide credibility to the claim that increased advertisements will produce efficacious results. Hence, without proper evidence, one cannot make a comprehensive conclusion or an informed decision regarding budget allotment.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-29 | Eurus Psycho Version | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | riyarmy | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-14 | Saket Choudhary | 68 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | Fahim Shahriar Khan | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Tanvi Sanandiya | 55 | view |
- The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette a local newspaper The primary function of the Committee for a Better Oak City is to advise the city government on how to make the best use of the city s limited budget However at som 75
- The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a large highly diversified company Ten years ago our company had two new office buildings constructed as regional headquarters for two different regions The buildings were erected by two different 60
- 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 ot 68
- The data from a survey of high school math and science teachers show that in the district of Sanlee many of these teachers reported assigning daily homework whereas in the district of Marlee most science and math teachers reported assigning homework no mo 60
- The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a company that builds shopping malls around the country The surface of a section of Route 101 paved just two years ago by Good Intentions Roadways is now badly cracked with a number of dangerous 58
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 390 350
No. of Characters: 2105 1500
No. of Different Words: 178 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.444 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.397 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.077 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 171 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 139 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 110 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.941 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.44 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.361 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.582 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.132 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 759, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...statement cannot be used to back up the directors recommendation. Secondly, how was t...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 316, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...crease in that number is negligible and shouldnt be considered as validation for the dir...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 361, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...dnt be considered as validation for the directors conclusion. Additionally, it is possibl...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 576, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
... reviews that is unaccounted for in the directors conclusion. Hence, without comparing th...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 735, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...ducing a detailed comparison chart, one shouldnt base major decision making simply an in...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, however, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2165.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 388.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.57989690722 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43821085614 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15383202558 2.78398813304 113% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.474226804124 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 691.2 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.9433056185 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.352941176 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8235294118 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.64705882353 5.70786347227 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.219791484048 0.218282227539 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0776249038643 0.0743258471296 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0824437197021 0.0701772020484 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150123671969 0.128457276422 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0840850527672 0.0628817314937 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 48.3550499002 67% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.38 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.