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."Based on a survey conducted by their own marketing department and certain comments by some reviewers, the director made flawed reasoning and drew unconvincing conclusions about the problems responsible for their shrinking market.
At first glance the argument proffered by the memo seems reasoanable. The advertisement should command for greater share of the budget in the next fiscal year. However the author relies on several unproven assumptions and as such its doubtful that increasing the advertisement budget will have the desired effect.
The argument suggests that since fewer people are attending Super Screen produced movies, the fault lies with advertising the movie. It might be very well possible that attendance of movie goers is down in general. With the advent of entertainment mediums such as Netflix and Hulu, movie goers numbers is down in general. There is no information about competitive movie production companies attendance numbers to back up the increase in the advertising budget.
The argument brings about the increase in positive reviews of the movie as an evidence. Though this a good indicator about the quality of the movie it might not necessairly draw out crowds. Movie reviewers tend to showers praise on a critical movie on a dense subject, such movies may draw out crowds to the threater despite positive reviews. What if the movie catalog of next year was full of such movies and not a single crowd pleaser? Increasing the advertisement budget in such case won't affect the number of people attending the movie.
Also there is no information regarding how the contents of these reviews will be promulgated to the public. If the reviewers share the movie review long after the movie is out of the cinema then Super Screen advertising wouldn't be of much help. This startegy might be back fire as well with people accusing the Production company of colluding with the movie reviewers.
Given that we don't know answers of these pressing questions, the argument goes beyond the available data in assuming advertisement budget increase in next fiscal year will increase the number of people attending the movie.
- Schools should cut funding for extracurricular activities such as sports and the arts when school buildingsare in need of repair. 50
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station. Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the comp 58
- PROMPT: All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. Write a response in which 16
- 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. 58
- Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. However, there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him. One such painting is known as attributed to Rembrandt because of its style, and 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 161, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... of the budget in the next fiscal year. However the author relies on several unproven a...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 89, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Though” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ve reviews of the movie as an evidence. Though this a good indicator about the quality...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 215, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'shower'.
Suggestion: shower
...raw out crowds. Movie reviewers tend to showers praise on a critical movie on a dense s...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...umber of people attending the movie. Also there is no information regarding how t...
^^^^
Line 7, column 221, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...he cinema then Super Screen advertising wouldnt be of much help. This startegy might be...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 269, Rule ID: BACK_FIRE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'backfire'?
Suggestion: backfire
...be of much help. This startegy might be back fire as well with people accusing the Produc...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 15, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...h the movie reviewers. Given that we dont know answers of these pressing question...
^^^^
Line 9, column 224, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e number of people attending the movie.
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'regarding', 'so', 'then', 'well', 'in general', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.302395209581 0.25644967241 118% => OK
Verbs: 0.131736526946 0.15541462614 85% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0928143712575 0.0836205057962 111% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0419161676647 0.0520304965353 81% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0119760479042 0.0272364105082 44% => OK
Prepositions: 0.152694610778 0.125424944231 122% => OK
Participles: 0.0449101796407 0.0416121511921 108% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.67220036548 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0119760479042 0.026700313972 45% => Some infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.00898203592814 0.001811407834 496% => OK
Determiners: 0.140718562874 0.113004496875 125% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0239520958084 0.0255425247493 94% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0059880239521 0.0127820249294 47% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1923.0 2731.13054187 70% => OK
No of words: 314.0 446.07635468 70% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.12420382166 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.57801047555 92% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.375796178344 0.378187486979 99% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.270700636943 0.287650121315 94% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.197452229299 0.208842608468 95% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.111464968153 0.135150697306 82% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67220036548 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 207.018472906 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.509554140127 0.469332199767 109% => OK
Word variations: 51.8494349114 52.1807786196 99% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 20.039408867 80% => OK
Sentence length: 19.625 23.2022227129 85% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.0337683743 57.7814097925 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.1875 141.986410481 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.625 23.2022227129 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.6875 0.724660767414 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 3.58251231527 223% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 46.6950636943 51.9672348444 90% => OK
Elegance: 2.6935483871 1.8405768891 146% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.449031145615 0.441005458295 102% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.145755206242 0.135418324435 108% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0667259048062 0.0829849096947 80% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.650881852104 0.58762219726 111% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.118194933223 0.147661913831 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.218522079922 0.193483328276 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0816874181665 0.0970749176394 84% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.415201501996 0.42659136922 97% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0712898481406 0.0774707102158 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.320060133056 0.312017818177 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0427177174651 0.0698173142475 61% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.33743842365 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.82512315271 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.