"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 given memo, the advertising director concludes and recommends that the Super Screen Movie Production Company must augment the budget allocated for advertising. The director concludes this based on the premise that the positive reviews of the movies are not reaching their proespective viewers inturn purging the attendance for the movies. However, the conclusion drawn by the director may hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically weakens the persuasiveness of the reccomendation. Therefore, before we could evaluate the agument, the following questions must be addressed.
First, Is the lack of awareness of positive reviews among the prospective viewers the only reason for fewer people attending movies? There can be a plethora of factors which discourage people from attending movies produced by Super-Screen Co. It is possible that there might be a new player in the movie production market attracting more people towards them and perhaps delivering a blockbuster movie. It is highly likely that people would attend any other movie than a proven hit, thanks to the widespread attention it recieves from mass communication mediums. Perhaps, the poeple are unhappy about the contents of the movies produced during the recent years. It is highly likely that certain shift in content delivery has not be well digested by the viewers leading to purge in attendance. If either of the above holds merit then the argument does not hold water.
Furthermore, the director cites that the percentage of positive reviews have actually increased during the past year. How much is the actual percentage of postive reviews? How much was percentage of positive reviews the preceading year? As the percentage increase is a dependent measure, we cannot estime the actual positive reviews unless we are provided with the reviews data. Perhaps the total positive reviews were already very low last year and therefore an increase makes no viable difference. Also, are the reviews authentic and well-accepted? Many times people are recultent to believe on reviews provided by private entities as they can be easily manipulated for economical gains. If the reviews were of the aforemention type then it is highly likely that people have developed an inherent recalcitrence towards movies by this company. If the above is true, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is weakened.
Finally, Is the current form of advertising the most effieicnt available in the market? It is highly likely that the current advertising firm is not reaching its intended amount of people and lacks in efficacy. So increasing the budget will not
In sum, the argument as it stands now is flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. The director fails to furnish the substantial data to back his claim. Also, the director develops an inefficient analogy between the people attending the movies and positive reviews. If the director is able to address the aforementioned questions and perhaps render the reports, then it will be possible to completely evaluate the viability of the reccomendation to augment the advertising budget.
| 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 |
- It is more important to keep your old friends than to make new friends 70
- Workers in the small town of Leeville take fewer sick days than workers in the large city of Masonton 50 miles away Moreover relative to population size the diagnosis of stress related illness is proportionally much lower in Leeville than in Masonton Acco 59
- Governments should invest as much in the arts as they do in the military Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and support 50
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Reading paper materials is better than watching electronic devices to gain information Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 76
- The following appeared in a letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University A study conducted at nearby Oceania University showed that faculty retention is higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university for thei 59
Comments
e-rater score 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: 26 15
No. of Words: 502 350
No. of Characters: 2632 1500
No. of Different Words: 247 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.733 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.243 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.845 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 215 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 163 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 112 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.308 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.184 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.538 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.279 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.482 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.104 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 242, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...on the premise that the positive reviews of the movies are not reaching their pro...
^^
Line 3, column 729, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...rtain shift in content delivery has not be well digested by the viewers leading to...
^^
Line 3, column 793, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...viewers leading to purge in attendance. If either of the above holds merit then th...
^^
Line 5, column 366, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'reviews'' or 'review's'?
Suggestion: reviews'; review's
...reviews unless we are provided with the reviews data. Perhaps the total positive review...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 691, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...asily manipulated for economical gains. If the reviews were of the aforemention ty...
^^
Line 7, column 245, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...icacy. So increasing the budget will not In sum, the argument as it stands now i...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 8, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...creasing the budget will not In sum, the argument as it stands now is flawed ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
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: 2693.0 2260.96107784 119% => OK
No of words: 502.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36454183267 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90650011061 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 254.0 204.123752495 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505976095618 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 855.0 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.3947234646 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.72 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.08 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.52 5.70786347227 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.26945237909 0.218282227539 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0649517864242 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.078803994548 0.0701772020484 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138949990036 0.128457276422 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0958555672111 0.0628817314937 152% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 98.500998004 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.