"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.
A memo from the advertising director of the super screen movie production company has stated that, although the produced movies by the company are good but due to lesser adversting about the movie, people are getting unaware of movie being produced by the company. However, while the conclusion drawn by the advertising direction may hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated would dramatically weaken the argument. Thus, the following three questions are to be addressed.
Firstly, is percentage of positive reviews credible enough? As the number of review are low, it could decrease the accuracy of a report or perhaps the reviews taken by the viewers are only taken from persons who have favourism towards the company, if either of the scenarios are proven true, the assertion of author might be hindered.
Secondly, are public not willing to watch movie even if they are aware of it? It might the scenario where people might have got influenced by the bad movies made by the company in the past, this bad influence could decrease there willingness to watch a movie, if such factor proves true, the conclusion given in the memo get hindered.
In conclusion, the memo given by the advertising director might be true. However, as it stands, the argument lies of three unfounded assumptions, for these assumptions to hold water, the questions mentioned above are to answered.
| 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 following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine Two studies of amphibians in Xanadu National Park confirm a significant decline in the numbers of amphibians In 1975 there were seven species of amphibians in the park and there were abu 60
- The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park with abundant numbers of each species However in 2002 only four species of amphibians 60
- 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 ot 54
- The increasingly rapid pace of life today causes more problems than it solves Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and support 16
- 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 ot 50
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, thus, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 28.8173652695 35% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 55.5748502994 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1191.0 2260.96107784 53% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 233.0 441.139720559 53% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11158798283 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90696013833 4.56307096286 86% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70840275554 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 130.0 204.123752495 64% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.557939914163 0.468620217663 119% => OK
syllable_count: 370.8 705.55239521 53% => syllable counts are too short.
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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 19.7664670659 46% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 87.8021063332 57.8364921388 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.333333333 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8888888889 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.66666666667 5.70786347227 169% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252568772156 0.218282227539 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0856875778295 0.0743258471296 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.116398410309 0.0701772020484 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131096835817 0.128457276422 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0998626987645 0.0628817314937 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 98.500998004 52% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.