Whilst it is understandable that the advertising director would like to increase the exposure Super Screen-produced movie, which in turn could lead to increase in profit for the company, a few questions will need to be addressed before one could fully decide on the merit of the recommendation to allocate a greater share of budget in the following year.
Firstly, the company needs to ask what the actual number of people attending its movie as compared to other production company. There could perhaps be a universal decline of viewership and not just one that is experienced only by Super Screen. If this is the case, advertising how much fun it is to go to the movies will yield better results than advertising about their good move reviews, a claim made by the advertising director.
Secondly, the company needs to ask how much have their positive reviews increased by. If is went from 1% to 2%, advertising about their good reviews will not have the desired results of increasing movie viewership. Super Screen would be much better off producing better movie qualities, which will most likely result in increased movie attendance. Worse still, if the percentage of positive reviews increased but the absolute number of positive reviews actually decreased, the advertising director is overstating the importance of advertising their good movie reviews. Instead, more effort should be focused on answering why the the number of positive movie reviews has in fact decreased.
Thirdly, Super Screen would need to ask what the relationship is between their viewers and movie reviewers. Through surveys and research on their target audience, Super Screen would need to determine what effect movie reviews have on viewer’s decision whether to go catch the movie. Also, Super Screen also needs to consider how its movies appeal to movie reviewers and general viewers. If Super Screen-produced movies recently seen a shift in genre to something such as drama, the general public might find the movie less appealing than movie reviewers.
Finally, Super Screen must ascertain whether the percentage of positive reviews is actually relevant to measure the potential impact of movie reviews. A popular movie reviewer’s feedbacks will have a much larger impact on the general public than small time film bloggers movie reviews. That is, Super Screen should not assign equal weightage of impact to all movie reviews. If the most popular movie reviewer rated Super Screen movie badly, even with a high percentage of good movie reviewers, general viewers might be dissuaded to watch the movie. They would need to think of a new advertising strategy instead of being fixated with the percentage of good reviews.
In conclusion, there are many questions that needs to be answer before heeding the advice of the advertising director. Super Screen would need to look carefully at the number for viewership and movie reviews, the relationship that target audience have with movie reviewers and the nuanced look at the movie reviews that they use in their advertising, failing which the proposed plan might not have the intended effect.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 626, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...fort should be focused on answering why the the number of positive movie reviews has in...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 626, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...fort should be focused on answering why the the number of positive movie reviews has in...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 488, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...n genre to something such as drama, the general public might find the movie less appealing tha...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 232, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...s will have a much larger impact on the general public than small time film bloggers movie rev...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'look', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'still', 'third', 'thirdly', 'in conclusion', 'in fact', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.277777777778 0.25644967241 108% => OK
Verbs: 0.152329749104 0.15541462614 98% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0913978494624 0.0836205057962 109% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0465949820789 0.0520304965353 90% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0232974910394 0.0272364105082 86% => OK
Prepositions: 0.111111111111 0.125424944231 89% => OK
Participles: 0.0465949820789 0.0416121511921 112% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.72377618559 2.79052419416 98% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0394265232975 0.026700313972 148% => OK
Particles: 0.00179211469534 0.001811407834 99% => OK
Determiners: 0.0878136200717 0.113004496875 78% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0358422939068 0.0255425247493 140% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0232974910394 0.0127820249294 182% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3140.0 2731.13054187 115% => OK
No of words: 506.0 446.07635468 113% => OK
Chars per words: 6.20553359684 6.12365571057 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7428307748 4.57801047555 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.379446640316 0.378187486979 100% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.280632411067 0.287650121315 98% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.205533596838 0.208842608468 98% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.126482213439 0.135150697306 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72377618559 2.79052419416 98% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 207.018472906 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.442687747036 0.469332199767 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 50.6261089381 52.1807786196 97% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.039408867 100% => OK
Sentence length: 25.3 23.2022227129 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.8229750909 57.7814097925 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 157.0 141.986410481 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.3 23.2022227129 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.85 0.724660767414 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 53.3632411067 51.9672348444 103% => OK
Elegance: 1.95967741935 1.8405768891 106% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.455349056011 0.441005458295 103% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.136733267609 0.135418324435 101% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.075606320552 0.0829849096947 91% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.616363536058 0.58762219726 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.156302705259 0.147661913831 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.195480320869 0.193483328276 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0684417669288 0.0970749176394 71% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.424846571592 0.42659136922 100% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0578342659098 0.0774707102158 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.315107213609 0.312017818177 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0217028951347 0.0698173142475 31% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 8.33743842365 228% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 6.87684729064 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 19.0 6.46551724138 294% => OK
Negative topic words: 0.0 5.36822660099 0% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 20.0 14.657635468 136% => 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.