Q. 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 given memo discusses the problem of lesser people attending Super Screen produced movies, despite the positive reviews increasing & recommend allocating a bigger budget to advertising in order to reach enough people as a solution. However, this memo poses certain questions which do not have satisfactory answers to back this recommendation.
To begin with, the advertising director has said that according to a marketing report, despite the lesser audience for Super screen produced movies, the percentage of positive reviews for specific movies have gone up in the past year. This poses certain questions. Firstly, the director says that the positive reviews for specific movies have gone up. But are these movies the recently produced ones or the old classics? If the reviews for old movies have increased that means the viewers are not interested in the newer movies that the production is making. There is no specific information given about which specific movies are getting reviews, and if they are what about the rest of the movies. If only specific ones are getting good reviews, that indicated that the other movies are not doing so well. No data about the reviews of other movies has been given and so no conclusion can be made whatsoever about the quality or reach of these movies.
The advertiser states that the problem does not lie with the quality of movies but with the public lack of awareness about good movies being available because the reviews are not reaching enough people. But what if the public is aware of these movies but does not like the topics of these movies or does not find them relatable or is disinterested in them? The director has in no way considered that the movies might actually be lacking something which is why they are getting lesser response. Maybe they are not making quality films to attract audience. He is fixated on his belief that the public is unaware about the movies. There is also a question of the quality of the reviews or the actual content of the film reviews. What if the reviews highlight unimportant factors of the movie like the lighting, aesthetics, the styling and background instead of important parameters like the script, storyline, acting & concept on which the movie is based? Such reviews would inherently fail to attract audience for the movie. None of the above has been taken into consideration by the director before making a recommendation.
In the end the director concludes that Super Screen needs to allocate a higher budget to reaching public in the following year. But what will the budget be used for? The budget might be increased by reducing money allocated to other important things like sets, actors or even the equipment used. In such a case will the increased budget be fruitful to achieve anticipated results? The use of the increased budget has also not been stated. There are no plans to justify where the budget will be used.
All the above questions considerably weaken the recommendation that the advertising director gives. Without the answers to these questions, the recommendation cannot be accepted as is. The answers to these question can lead to the actual problem & help in finding a more accurate & useful solution to the problem of lesser reach for the 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 most ideal path for a society to set up its youngsters for positions of authority in government industry or different fields is by imparting in them a feeling of collaboration not rivalry Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you a 75
- Q 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 79
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 28 15
No. of Words: 546 350
No. of Characters: 2669 1500
No. of Different Words: 219 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.834 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.888 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.541 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 200 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 138 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.91 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.536 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.491 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.118 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, so, well, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2733.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 546.0 441.139720559 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00549450549 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83390555256 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61143385458 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.417582417582 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 859.5 705.55239521 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 55.7329982312 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.6071428571 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.78571428571 5.70786347227 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => 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: 0.194355960341 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0518653430523 0.0743258471296 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0652756284928 0.0701772020484 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103709795363 0.128457276422 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0608877207977 0.0628817314937 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.