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 statement, the memo from the advertising director claims that as fewer people attended thier movies than any other year, even though the reviews were possitive, the public is unaware about the movie. Therefore, he wants to increase the advertising budget for the next year, so that they can promote the movie to the public. Though his claim may well have merit, the directors poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable assumptions, and baseed solely on the evidence the avdvertising director offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue in the avertising director's argument lies in his unsusbtantiated reasoning. In the previous years, the amount of total positive reviews recieved might have been too low, like 1000, when compared to the larger audience who might have attended then, suppose 10,000. This would give 10% positive review for that year. But this year, as fewer people came for screening, like 2000, but the amount of total reviews for this year remained same, it will result in 50% positive review for theyear, an increase of 40% in positive reviews even though the number of reviews were same for the two years when contrasted. The author's premise and lack of any evidentiary support render his conclusion unacceptable.
In addition to this, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. He believes that the quality of the movie is good, on the basis of the increase in review percentage and that the audience is not aware enough about that movie. It might be true that a lesser number of people attended as compared to previous years, but they might have only attended because they are fans of specific movie genre or might have had something different from the other cliche movies which released that year. This might have made those fans to review the movie positively,but the general public who is not interested in that genre might not have been able to grasp the concept of the film correctly therefore is ignoring waching it.
While the director does have severy key issues in his argument, that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. If the director, wants to bolster his argument he have to provide more details along with research.
| 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: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 12 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 376 350
No. of Characters: 1820 1500
No. of Different Words: 191 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.403 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.84 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.387 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 127 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 88 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 26 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.857 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.922 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.643 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.352 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.563 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.17 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 565, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , but
...hose fans to review the movie positively,but the general public who is not intereste...
^^^^
Line 5, column 574, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... to review the movie positively,but the general public who is not interested in that genre mig...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 176, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'he' must be used with a third-person verb: 'has'.
Suggestion: has
...ector, wants to bolster his argument he have to provide more details along with rese...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, so, then, therefore, well, while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1871.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 375.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.98933333333 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40055868397 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4729563055 2.78398813304 89% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 204.123752495 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.517333333333 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 580.5 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.4349109652 57.8364921388 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.642857143 119.503703932 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.7857142857 23.324526521 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.21428571429 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151604249308 0.218282227539 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0561636207401 0.0743258471296 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0706908091853 0.0701772020484 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0976667048814 0.128457276422 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.06704468912 0.0628817314937 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 98.500998004 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.