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.”
The conclusion by the director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company that that the contents of the reviews are not reaching the prospective viewers based on the evidence that fewer people attended the Super Screen-produced movies in the last year than any other year is one that seems very valid at first, but there are some very key questions that need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation that a greater share of the budget for next year should be allocated to advertising is a reasonable one.
Firstly, the director has prematurely concluded that the drop in attendance was not as a result of the quality of the movies. While he has the evidence that there was an increase in the number of positive reviews when compared to other years, he did not take into consideration the fact that the reviewers were particulary intrigued with some particular things about the movie, while some other parts of the movies were displeasing to the viewers. If the possibility arises that some parts of the movies displeased the attendees, then his argument is greatly flawed. If the director can provide a comprehensive evidence of the contents of the reviews by the movie reviewers, and possibly reviews from the attendees, then we can better evaluate this recommendation.
Also, the conclusion that the drop in the number of attendees was only as a result of poor advertising and that the contents of the reviews are not reaching prospective viewers is not a strong one. The director should answer the question of whether or not the advertising for the previous years and the advertising for the past years were different. If the answer to this question is that they advertised more in other years than they did in the past year, then his recommendation could be valid. However, if ther is any proof that the advertising in the last year eas the same as or greater than the advertising in the other years, then the authors conclusion that the drop in the attendance was as a result of poor advertising.
In conclusion, the director should be able to answer the question that have been asked above and also provide substantial evidence that would further support his argument that if more funds are allocated to advertising, there would be a great increase in the number of attendees in the Super Screen-produced movies.
| 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 chart below shows the result of a survey about peoples coffee and tea buying and drinking habits in five Australian cities Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- In some countries owning a home rather than renting one is very important for people Why might this be the case Do you think this is a positive or negative situation Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or 73
- Men and women because of their inherent physical differences are not equally suited for many tasks Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be sure to address 66
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increase time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this time period most of the complaint 68
- 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 59
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 11 15
No. of Words: 399 350
No. of Characters: 1916 1500
No. of Different Words: 153 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.469 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.802 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.788 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 121 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 95 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 73 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 36.273 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 20.824 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.818 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.429 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.429 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.158 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 77, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: that
...e Super Screen Movie Production Company that that the contents of the reviews are not rea...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 225, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
... strong one. The director should answer the question of whether or not the advertising for the previous...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 642, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...dvertising in the other years, then the authors conclusion that the drop in the attenda...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, so, then, while, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1945.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 399.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87468671679 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46933824581 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84174941304 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 204.123752495 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.40350877193 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 611.1 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 19.7664670659 51% => 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: 39.0 22.8473053892 171% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 119.202181188 57.8364921388 206% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 194.5 119.503703932 163% => OK
Words per sentence: 39.9 23.324526521 171% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.3 5.70786347227 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.245658704097 0.218282227539 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0921962423301 0.0743258471296 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0733822618787 0.0701772020484 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148738073657 0.128457276422 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.083447600568 0.0628817314937 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.5 14.3799401198 150% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.35 48.3550499002 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.3 12.197005988 142% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.56 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 98.500998004 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 28.5 12.3882235529 230% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 17.6 11.1389221557 158% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.9071856287 151% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.