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 argument states that there is lack of publlic awareness about the available good qualities of movie, thus by allocating a greater share of its budget to advertising, Super Screen Movie Production Comapny will be able to reach the public. The argument in its current form is not convincing - the support provided for the conclusion is weak ant the argument makes too many unwarranted assumptions.
Firslty, the argument does not evaluate the real reason for the decrease in the number of people attending Super Screen- produced movies. Without any report or authentic data it comes to the bold conclusion that it is due to the lack of awareness among people about the good quality movies. It fails to consider the possibility that the decrease in number could be because of various reasons like - people did not find their favourite star performing, economy was down last year and thus people could not afford to spend money on entertainment, of the movie CDs were disributed illegally and thus people preffered the cheaper way. Thus it is indispensable to know why the number of audience decreased. The argument is rife with holes and thus not substantiate enough to lead to a successful conclusion.
Secondly, the author naively assumes that the increase in the percentage of positive reviews(that too about specific Super Screen Movies) imples that the quality of movies is amazing. Although there is an increase in he percentage of positive reviews compared to the last year but there could be a decrease in the actual number of positive reviews compared to the last year, hence percentages paint ambiguous and vague picture of the reality. Moreover, the percentage could have increased due to other reasons like the negative reviewers did not attent the movies last year or people gave positive reviews because their favourite star performend and not because of the high quality of the movie. Thus the reason for the increased percentages of posiive reviews must be evaluated. The argument engages in too many clear logical fallacies and fails to successfully defend its conclusion.
Thirdly, the argument comes to an overly broad conclusion that increasing the share of budget for advertisement will increase the reachability of the advertisement. It is possible that the reachability is at maximum level but people still lack awareness about the movies due to the poor content of advertising, people are not able to comprehend the message that Super Screen movies wishes to convey. Otherwise, the reason foe people not showing up coul be that the movies are not appealing(though advetisement is proper) and people do not get what they want to see. Thus the organisation must look into the needs of people and scrutinize the content that is displayed on the advertisement before increasing the share of budget for it.
In sum, the argument is based on unconfirmed premises and unsubstatiated assumptions in order to evaluate the merits of the argument, we need more data and information about the points mentioned above.
| 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 |
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 17 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 495 350
No. of Characters: 2492 1500
No. of Different Words: 220 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.717 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.034 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.78 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 184 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 134 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 98 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 29.118 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.631 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.647 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.348 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.571 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.11 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 399, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uld be because of various reasons like - people did not find their favourite star...
^^
Line 3, column 633, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... thus people preffered the cheaper way. Thus it is indispensable to know why the num...
^^^^
Line 5, column 213, Rule ID: HE_THE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'in the percentage'?
Suggestion: in the percentage
... amazing. Although there is an increase in he percentage of positive reviews compared to the las...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 695, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...cause of the high quality of the movie. Thus the reason for the increased percentage...
^^^^
Line 7, column 565, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...eople do not get what they want to see. Thus the organisation must look into the nee...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, then, third, thirdly, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2541.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 495.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13333333333 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71684168287 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84784527396 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.454545454545 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 802.8 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 69.0951903443 57.8364921388 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 149.470588235 119.503703932 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.1176470588 23.324526521 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.11764705882 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.159436457679 0.218282227539 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0558418840739 0.0743258471296 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0597435543136 0.0701772020484 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0867285495607 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0488431057623 0.0628817314937 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.3550499002 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.07 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.