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 i

The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company (SSMPC) makes the claim that the recent decline in movie viewership could be improved by increasing the SSMPC advertising budget. He/she also claims that, since the percentage of positive reviews increased in the last year, that people who do attend SSMPC films enjoy those films, and the lack of viewership is due to lack of exposure to advertising, rather than some other factor (such as an increase in ticket price). Lastly, the advertising director makes the claim that money spent on advertising would bring in more customers, and implies that this will increase SSMPC profits (assuming that this is the advertising director's goal). In this essay, I will explore the veracity of these claims and highlight what questions would need to be answered in order to support or reject the advertising director's claims.

The advertising director's first claim--that the decline in viewership is due to poor advertising--rests on shaky ground. There are several other factors that could contribute to a decline in viewership. Among these factors are a decline in the economy (and therefore less leisure spending), a low-quality year in film (e.g. unpopular movies being produced), or an increase in ticket price (leading to lower ticket demand). In order to investigate the true source of the viewership decline, data on the economy, film-quality (via film review websites like IMDB), and historical ticket prices--at SSMPC and nearby theaters--would be required. Furthermore, SSMPC's choice of what films to screen could also be a factor in declining viewership. If SSMPC has been screening unpopular movies, it is less likely that a bigger advertising budget will bring individuals in to see undesirable movies. This would actually cause the advertisement director's plan to backfire, and would likely lead to a decline in profits.

The advertising director's second claim is that, since positive reviews for SSMPC's films are increasing, it means that the popularity of its films are also increasing. This claim, however, does not account for "selection bias" among viewers. If, for example, half the individuals in 2015 gave SSMPC's movie's a 1 out of 10 review, and the other have gave it a 10 out of 10 review, if the individuals who gave SSMPC movies a 1 out of 10 movie stopped attending their films (and therefore stopped leaving reviews), the average review score would jump from 5.5 to 10. This would make it appear as if SSMPC movies are increasing in popularity, but would actually indicate attrition of a certain type of viewer that does not enjoy SSMPC films. To evalulate this claim, the advertising director should collect data on the film ratings of customers who have stopped attending SSMPC films, i.e. those that are responsible for the decline in viewership. If the viewers who no longer attend SSMPC films provided lower average ratings of their films than those who are still attending, it would damage the credibility of the claim that the popularity of SSMPC's films is increasing.

The last claim of the advertising director is that money spent on advertising would bring in more customers, and increase the profit of the SSMPC. This makes the specious assumption that film-consumers are succeptible to advertising and that the main reason they are not attending SSMPC's films is that they have not been exposed to SSMPC's selection of films. If the decline in viewership is due to increased ticket prices, a bad economy, a bad year in film, or selection of unpopular films by SSMPC, advertising is unlikely to fix the problem. Ironically, increasing the advertising budget could actually decrease the profits of SSMPC due to money wasted on ineffective advertising, if the source of viewership decline has to do with affordability or film popularity. To test the advertising director's claim, he/she should convene an advertising test groups of both patrons who have stopped attending SSMPC and patrons who have never been, and test their responsiveness to advertising. If old SSMPC patrons are unaffected by advertising, the advertising director should focus the advertising budget on new patrons. If neither are affected, increasing the advertising budget will be a waste of time and money.

In conclusion, while it may seem reasonable to interpret the simultaneous decline in viewership and increase in positive reviews with an inadequate advertising budget, without the data sets listed in the prior paragraphs, the advertising director's claims may be false and increasing the advertising budget may not be effective in increasing viewership and profit for SSMPC. To assume that the decline in viewership does not lie witht the quality of SSMPC's films, but with the public's lack of awareness is to make a crucial mistake. To make an informed decision, the advertising director should collect data on movie patron's historical viewing habits, historical reviews, and larger economic trends.