In the memo, the director of SS Movie Production Company has advocated in favor of expanding the reach of their movies by planning to allocate more funds on an advertisement campaign. He or she came to this decision on the basis a discrepancy between the positive reviews published by critics and a diminishing number of customers. However, the decision is based upon many unwarranted assumptions that if false would seriously undermine the argument. Therefore, three questions need to be answered before the validity of the argument could be fully evaluated.
First, are the reviewers unbiased towards the movies? It is possible that the authors that praised Super Screen movies have been influenced by the previous works. Perhaps the content in the movies is not original, which is something that can be despised by a significant number of prospective consumers. For instance, parody movies are consumed and praised more by those who have had previously watched the movie on which the work is based. On the other hand, the unaware public tends to push such content to the side. In addition, the director has not specified the total number of critic. If five critics out of twenty, drop positive reviews, the percentage would be tantamount to 100% but this is not representative of the entire critic community. If this is true, then the argument does not hold water.
Second, is the public interested in paying attention to advertisements? Perhaps a majority of movie-goers are influenced by the quality of trailers and word of mouth. Many individuals might get annoyed or get if an extensive ad campaign is launched. In additions, with the advent of AdBlocker, an extension for web browsers, many firms have witnessed diminishing revenues. Perhaps due to this fact, SS Movie Company would be forced to push their ads on radio, newspapers or other conventional non-electronic media. Owing to the fact that the youth are predisposed to use the internet and electronic media up to a greater extent, this approach is highly likely to fail. The argument would be significantly weakened if any of the above circumstances turn out to be true.
Third, would the quality of movies remain better if they allocate more budget on marketing? It might be possible that the company would fail to attract great actors and personalities owing to limited amount of money that the company would be left to offer them. In addition, with the fluctuation in the prices of commodities, film making technologies can get expensive. For instance, recently, the world has witness a shortage of semiconductors and by the same token, camera costs have skyrocketed.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is seriously flawed owing to the unfounded assumptions that the director has made. Perhaps if more supporting evidence is provided through detailed surveys (or well-designed scientific studies), the decision could be rendered more viable.
- Some people believe that traveling to and living in numerous places increases one s ability to relate and connect to other people Others believe that this ability is better cultivated by living in one place and developing a deep understanding of that comm 66
- To reverse a decline in listener numbers our owners have decided that WWAC must change from its current rock music format The decline has occurred despite population growth in our listening area but that growth has resulted mainly from people moving here 75
- Sports stars movie stars have an obligation to behave as role models for the young people who look up to them In return for the millions of dollars that they are paid we should expect them to fulfill this societal responsibility 83
- The following memorandum is from the president of Primo Doll Manufacturing Inc According to a survey last year of parents who purchased the Elkie our most popular doll 90 percent reported that although their children were extremely satisfied with the doll 59
- Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances times and places
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 7 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 476 350
No. of Characters: 2389 1500
No. of Different Words: 251 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.671 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.019 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.866 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 174 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 138 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 106 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.04 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.003 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.64 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.251 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.446 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.048 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, then, therefore, third, well, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, by the same token, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2459.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 476.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16596638655 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67091256922 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95294389668 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 204.123752495 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529411764706 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 767.7 705.55239521 109% => 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: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.1127099495 57.8364921388 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.36 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.04 23.324526521 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 5.70786347227 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184141201135 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0489134157755 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0901398403134 0.0701772020484 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0895915110873 0.128457276422 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0937882360865 0.0628817314937 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 98.500998004 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.