"According to a recent report by 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 last year. Clearly, the content of these reviews is not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not in the quality of our movies but with public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater quantity of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising."
Recently, the Super Screen Production Company advertising director pass the memo. Regarding the author of the argument concludes the Super Screen should, therefore, allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising. He presents evidence to suggest this valid including yet the percentage of positive review by movie reviewer. Though the underlying issue may have merit, because of a lack of relevant evidence, unaddressed assumptions, and vague terminology.
First, the report according to during the past year, fewer people attended the Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movie actually increased during the past year so positive review instead of directors assume that the quality of his movies is good but that is not a right way to determine the quality of movie because this reviewers perspective good so not generalize to all other people.
Second, the many reasons possible to the contents of the reviews are not reaching the enough of our prospective viewers like the not only lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available but also the cost of movies very high so the lesser viewer or some people not interest in Super Screen Movie. So, this solution is not good for these situations.
In this argument, the director does not include the proper evidence of the good quality of movies. And also, assume that the public's lack of awareness about Super Screen Movie.
So, the author's solution is not suitable for this situation.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-25 | rubelmonir | 16 | view |
| 2023-07-25 | rubelmonir | 60 | view |
| 2023-07-23 | Mizanur_Rahman | 50 | view |
| 2023-02-14 | tedyang777 | 60 | view |
| 2022-11-13 | barath002 | 58 | view |
- The following appeared as part of an article in the education section of a Waymarsh City newspaper Throughout the last two decades those who earned graduate degrees found it very difficult to get jobs teaching their academic specialties at the college 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 70
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers 33
- Claim Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today Reason The world today is significantly more complex than it was even in the relatively recent past Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 264, Rule ID: THE_SOME_DAY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'same'?
Suggestion: same
...s very high so the lesser viewer or the some people not interest in Super Screen Mov...
^^^^
Line 5, column 346, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ovie. So, this solution is not good for this situations. In this argument, the di...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, if, may, regarding, second, so, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 19.6327345309 31% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 12.9520958084 15% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 28.8173652695 45% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1334.0 2260.96107784 59% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 256.0 441.139720559 58% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2109375 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.56307096286 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62228980256 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 204.123752495 68% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.54296875 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 422.1 705.55239521 60% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 19.7664670659 56% => 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: 95.7463073539 57.8364921388 166% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.272727273 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2727272727 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.27272727273 5.70786347227 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => 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: 0.506821242075 0.218282227539 232% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.171089555025 0.0743258471296 230% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.197726971195 0.0701772020484 282% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.235262074319 0.128457276422 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.235746137313 0.0628817314937 375% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 98.500998004 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.