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 memo analysed reasons for the decreasing number of people attending Super Screen-produced movies during last year. The advertising director concluded that this decrease is not because of the quality of the movies but due to the paucity of advertisement. This essay is going to argue that three questions need to be asked before the above conclusion can be reached. Explicitly, whether the phenomenon is unique for last year; the exact mechanism behind movie evaluation; and the existence of other elements affecting the number of movie audience.
The first important question needs to be asked is whether there is anything special happened during last year. It is apparent that the decline of movie audience in one single year cannot be used as a general trend, because real word phenomena involves a large amount of randomness. For example, since the economy has its inherent cycles, it is likely that last year experienced an economic depression, and thus people tend to save more and spend less on entertainment. If that is true, then the decrease of movie audience has nothing to do with the Super Screen Movie Production Company itself. The company does not need to change its marketing strategy, instead, it only has to wait for the market to recover. Otherwise, if there is
nothing special happened, the company might need to suspect if the decline is due to their unpreferable market strategy and thus adjust the budget on advertising.
The second question needs to be addressed is the exact mechanism behind movie evaluation. It is probable that people are more inclined to evaluate a movie if they are consent about it. In this case, if people's degree of satisfaction is associated with the probability that they evaluate the movie, it is not surprising that the evaluation appears to be positive. However, with this respect, the evaluation system is actually confounded by other element other than the quality of the movie, and thus it becomes uninformative. Whence, the company should be cautious when using the evaluation as a measurement of the movie quality, because it might not reveal the truth.
The last question is whether there exist other reasons leading to the decreasing volume of audience. It might be the case that the true reason that people do not want to consume Super Screen movies is that the price is too expensive. Or, alternatively, the location of the theaters are not convenient enough. Therefore, solely increasing the budget on advertising might not be beneficent. The company should first investigate the real reason closely. Nevertheless, if it is certain that advertising is the leading reason for that sell declination, then increasing the budget on it would likely be necessary.
In conclusion, this essay has argued that three questions - the uniqueness of last year, the mechanism of movie evaluation, and the possibility of other reasons - needs to be asked, depending on which, the solution of increasing budget on advertisement might or might not be helpful. Further studies could be conducted on the possibilities to improve the movie evaluation system to make it more informative and reliable both to the movie producers and to other audiences.
| 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 |
- a jazz music club in Monroe 65
- Claim We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from those whose views contradict our own Reason Disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning 50
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society one must study its major cities Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In develo 50
- The author is primarily concerned with 16
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 58
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 522 350
No. of Characters: 2618 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.78 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.015 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.758 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 193 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 146 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.75 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.57 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.583 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.288 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.51 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.044 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Nothing
...et to recover. Otherwise, if there is nothing special happened, the company might nee...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 285, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Further,
...tisement might or might not be helpful. Further studies could be conducted on the possi...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, hence, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, then, therefore, thus, as to, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2686.0 2260.96107784 119% => OK
No of words: 522.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14559386973 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77988695657 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87063184907 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 204.123752495 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.448275862069 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 850.5 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.0332628892 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.782608696 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6956521739 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.39130434783 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.190156188572 0.218282227539 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0649813987697 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0749128524569 0.0701772020484 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106685794866 0.128457276422 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.064203056753 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 98.500998004 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.