A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio.
“We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10% in order to ensure a quality product. As you know, we are working with a first-time director, whose only previous experience has been shooting commercials for a shampoo company. Since the advertising business is notoriously wasteful, it stands to reason that our director will expect to be able to shoot take after take, without concern for how much time is being spent on any one scene. In addition, while we have saved money by hiring relatively inexperienced assistant producers and directors, this savings in salary will undoubtedly translate to greater expenditures in paying the actors and unionized crew overtime for the extra hours they will spend on the set waiting for the assistant directors and producers to arrange things. If we don’t get this extra money, the movie is virtually assured to be a failure.”
The memo written by the movie producer to the head of the movie studio showing his concern regarding the success of the movie directed by the first-time director might seem justified at first glance and all the concerns he talks about and states in the memo might seem valid at first, but after reading the memo with deep concentration and understanding it is very evident that the movie producer has missed out on a couple of things, has not answered some important questions and not provided sufficient data and information to back his claims. Some of the issues and flaws in the argument are as follows.
Firstly, the author states that just because the director has never directed a movie before, the only experience he has is of shooting commercials for a shampoo company. He will not be economical and spend money frivolously. The author cites a common generalization regarding the advertising business saying that they are known for being notorious and wasteful and merely assumes that the director would be the same. He hasn't provided any information to back his claim that just because the director shot a shampoo commercial, he will be wasteful. If the author would have provided with some data from the record of the shampoo commercial shot by the director which would prove that, yes the director is wasteful and would spend money frivolously. The author's claim would make sense but just by following the generalization is not enough, for all we know is that the director might be a miser.
Furthermore, the movie producer claims that the director is not absolutely sincere in his work, that the shoot takes after take and not value the time he is losing in shooting the same scene over and over again. It is absolutely possible that on the set of the movie the director will have to take multiple takes until he is satisfied. But there can be various reasons why the director might have to take so many takes such as he is not happy with the performance of the actors, there was some kind of technical difficulty, or possibly the lighting is not proper. Therefore, blaming the inexperienced director or the inexperienced support staff is not justified. The author should take into account all these extra factors which might possibly require the extra 10% in order to ensure a quality product.
Moving on, the author states that the money the studio has saved by hiring relatively inexperienced staff for the movie will undoubtedly translate to higher expenditure in paying the staff and support staff. There is absolutely no claim to back this kind of an assertion, the author has failed to provide any kind of support or data to back his claims. All of the assertions made by the author is merely based on the generalization of the advertising business and how they are so wasteful. If the author would have have provided with some kind of information stating that inexperienced staff is known for causing problems which would result in taking multiple retakes and spending the resources or they have done something like this in the past, there would be some kind of weightage in the author's claims. But the author has not provided any such thing to support his assertions.
In conclusion, the intent of the movie producer to save the movie from being a failure is a righteous one and it cannot be overlooked. But the lack of proper information and the inability to take into consideration all the factors rather than focusing on one assumption relating to the generalization of the advertising industry. Is the reason that the argument has no weightage and probably would not receive the addition 10% the author has requested.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-18 | Gnyana | 58 | view |
| 2023-07-16 | Technoblade | 66 | view |
| 2023-03-16 | Yam Kumar Oli | 58 | view |
| 2022-09-14 | Sumilak | 78 | view |
| 2022-01-22 | shyamforever | 59 | view |
- A nation should require all its students to the study the same national curriculum until they enter college 50
- A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10 in order to ensure a quality product As you know we are working with a first time director whose only previous exper 66
- If we want to save money on municipal garbage disposal fees we need to encourage our residents to recycle more Late last year our neighboring town Hayesworth passed a law requiring that all households recycle paper and glass or pay a fine Since that time 58
- Men and women because of their inherent physical differences are not equally suited for many tasks 66
- Claim An action is morally correct if the amount of good that results from the action is greater than the amount of bad that results from the action Reason When assessing the morality of an action the results of the action are more important than the inte 50
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 547, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...ata and information to back his claims. Some of the issues and flaws in the argument are as...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 421, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hasn't
...that the director would be the same. He hasnt provided any information to back his cl...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 563, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had provided'?
Suggestion: had provided
...ial, he will be wasteful. If the author would have provided with some data from the record of the s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 730, Rule ID: MIGHT_PERHAPS[1]
Message: Use simply 'might', 'possibly'.
Suggestion: might; possibly
...o account all these extra factors which might possibly require the extra 10% in order to ensur...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 730, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'might'.
Suggestion: might
...o account all these extra factors which might possibly require the extra 10% in order to ensur...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 251, Rule ID: KIND_OF_A[1]
Message: Don't include 'an' after a classification term. Use simply 'kind of'.
Suggestion: kind of
...ere is absolutely no claim to back this kind of an assertion, the author has failed to pro...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 354, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: All the
... of support or data to back his claims. All of the assertions made by the author is merely...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 511, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: have
...ey are so wasteful. If the author would have have provided with some kind of information ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 516, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
...e so wasteful. If the author would have have provided with some kind of information ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, look, regarding, so, therefore, in conclusion, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.9520958084 162% => OK
Conjunction : 27.0 11.1786427146 242% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 75.0 55.5748502994 135% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3032.0 2260.96107784 134% => OK
No of words: 623.0 441.139720559 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.86677367576 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.99599519102 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7058192025 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.390048154093 0.468620217663 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 955.8 705.55239521 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 102.56340332 57.8364921388 177% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.380952381 119.503703932 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.6666666667 23.324526521 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.80952380952 5.70786347227 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.25449101796 171% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.209912053635 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0587151842288 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0646859331762 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12522181451 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0643698740403 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.56 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 27.0 12.3882235529 218% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 547, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...ata and information to back his claims. Some of the issues and flaws in the argument are as...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 421, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hasn't
...that the director would be the same. He hasnt provided any information to back his cl...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 563, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had provided'?
Suggestion: had provided
...ial, he will be wasteful. If the author would have provided with some data from the record of the s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 730, Rule ID: MIGHT_PERHAPS[1]
Message: Use simply 'might', 'possibly'.
Suggestion: might; possibly
...o account all these extra factors which might possibly require the extra 10% in order to ensur...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 730, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'might'.
Suggestion: might
...o account all these extra factors which might possibly require the extra 10% in order to ensur...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 251, Rule ID: KIND_OF_A[1]
Message: Don't include 'an' after a classification term. Use simply 'kind of'.
Suggestion: kind of
...ere is absolutely no claim to back this kind of an assertion, the author has failed to pro...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 354, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: All the
... of support or data to back his claims. All of the assertions made by the author is merely...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 511, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: have
...ey are so wasteful. If the author would have have provided with some kind of information ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 516, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
...e so wasteful. If the author would have have provided with some kind of information ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, look, regarding, so, therefore, in conclusion, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.9520958084 162% => OK
Conjunction : 27.0 11.1786427146 242% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 75.0 55.5748502994 135% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3032.0 2260.96107784 134% => OK
No of words: 623.0 441.139720559 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.86677367576 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.99599519102 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7058192025 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.390048154093 0.468620217663 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 955.8 705.55239521 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 102.56340332 57.8364921388 177% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.380952381 119.503703932 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.6666666667 23.324526521 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.80952380952 5.70786347227 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.25449101796 171% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.209912053635 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0587151842288 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0646859331762 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12522181451 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0643698740403 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.56 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 27.0 12.3882235529 218% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.