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 argument claims that the reason why fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies while the percentage of positive reviews increased is that the public is unaware of the presence of high-quality movies. Therefore, the advertising director of Movie Production Company makes a conclusion that the company should spend a greater part of its budget on the advertisement. The argument looks quite logical at first glance; however, a closer examination reveals that the writer relies on several unsupported assumptions and suggests a groundless cause-effect reasoning, which makes his argumentation unconvincing.
To begin with, the author mentions that during the past year a fewer number of people visited Super Screed-produced movies than in any other year. However, the director fails to present any statistics or survey in support of his statement. What if the population of the city decreased because many young people left for bigger cities? What if the number of the company's movies became fewer than it had been before? These questions undermine the author's statement because he could not bolster his position with convincing data such as official estimates or surveys. If the author had provided necessary information such as mentioned above, the director's reasoning would have been more grounded.
Secondly, the author claims that the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about Super Screen movies increased during the last year. Undoubtedly, such an assumption may be reasonable; however, in that passage, it is not because the author failed to provide any information on these reviewers. The percentage may have increased because of changed number of experts. Say, half of them have not taken part this year, and accurate this half had valued the company's films as poor-quality films. In that case, the percentage would increase. We can also consider a scenario when some reviewers withheld to make a review. Such a situation may also lead to another percentage of positive reviews. This flaw could have been avoided if the author provided readers with relevant information on the reviewers, on the number of them and on the results of last years.
Finally, the author assumes that spending a greater share of company's budget on the advertisement will lead to increase in public that attend the company's movies. Of course, the advertisement may help the company to bring new customers and let people know about Super Screen-produced movies. However, the author has never mentioned what kind of advertising the company used before. Maybe, the firm only advertised its films through newspapers that are unpopular among the town's population. In that case, spending a greater amount of money on advertising will not result in any increase of the customers. If the author had mentioned in which way the company promoted its films, his reasoning could have become more convincing.
To sum up, the advertising director fails to mention some important aspects, which makes his argument weak and unconvincing. If the author had provided more relevant information such as statistics, surveys, and official documents, his argumentation would have been way more reasonable and flawless.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-06 | Sumaiya Mila | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-06 | Shams Tarek | 46 | view |
| 2020-01-02 | jamaya8 | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-26 | Yongrok_Jeong | 49 | view |
| 2019-12-10 | Opak Pulu | 16 | view |
- Mistakes are necessary for discovery or progress 54
- The effectiveness of a country's leaders is best measured by examining the well-being of that country's citizens. 58
- Some employers are sure that control helps to increase productivity and create a team spirit, which would lead to better results so that firms could gain more profit. Other people claim that there is no need in keeping an eye on workers. 83
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 58
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 446, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...n before? These questions undermine the authors statement because he could not bolster ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 473, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'towns'' or 'town's'?
Suggestion: towns'; town's
...newspapers that are unpopular among the towns population. In that case, spending a gr...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 207, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...information such as statistics, surveys, and official documents, his argumentatio...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, kind of, of course, such as, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2716.0 2260.96107784 120% => OK
No of words: 503.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.39960238569 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73578520332 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89269947273 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.475149105368 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 842.4 705.55239521 119% => 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: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.7681315223 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.64 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.12 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.56 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.168702634301 0.218282227539 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0516328241729 0.0743258471296 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0748743605759 0.0701772020484 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100331366482 0.128457276422 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0497502667462 0.0628817314937 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => 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: 14.04 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.