The argument states that the number of people who saw the Super Screen- produced movies were fewer than in any other year and yet the proportion of positive reviews by reviewers about such movies increased during the past year. The argument further claims that the reach of the reviews is limited and further investment must be made to increase the said reach through advertising. Stated this way, the argument is a far stretch and it readily assumes a lot of things which we will discuss in detail below.
Firstly, the argument assumes that as the percentage of positive reviews has increased, it has become hugely positive in quantitative terms. The case might be that the percentage of positive reviews might have increased from 32 percent to 34 percent. The argument assumes that this slight increase will sway the public in the positive direction and should improve the actual number of people watching the movies. The arugment could have been better had the marketing department asked the question that by how much percent the actual increase has happened and whether this increase in the percentage of positive reviews has landed the final percentage close to or above 50 percent. A yes-answer to this question could have well justified the additional budget spending on advertisement.
Secondly, the argument believes that the quality of the movies is good and at par with the expectation of the regular movie goers. This statement is a stretch as the recent movie viewers might not be the regular movie viewers and might not know on what parameters a movie should be judged. For example, during COVID-19 times, the footfall of the movie viewers reduced but the reviews for the movies became positive by a huge margin as per Rotten Tomatoes, a movie critic rating engine. Further analysis showed that since those who were willing to take the risk to watch a movie during the covid times were not the actual movie viewers but people who were bored of the lockdown. Thus, the movie reviews were inflated in the positive sense and the content of the movie was below par. The marketing department should have asked the question about the experience of the movie viewers with respect to the judgement of the movies for an effective analysis of the quality of the movie on the screen. An answer to this question would have justified the additional spending on advertisement.
The argument stated is the current way is not full proof and lacks a careful analysis. The argument can be made better by addressing the aforementioned questions and then draw conclusions basis the answers to all such questions.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 439 350
No. of Characters: 2139 1500
No. of Different Words: 194 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.577 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.872 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.475 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 118 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.824 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.658 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.471 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.355 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.564 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.136 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 239, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... might have increased from 32 percent to 34 percent. The argument assumes that th...
^^
Line 3, column 415, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...l number of people watching the movies. The arugment could have been better had the...
^^^
Line 3, column 480, Rule ID: ASK_THE_QUESTION[1]
Message: Use simply 'asked' instead.
Suggestion: asked
...een better had the marketing department asked the question that by how much percent the actual inc...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 656, Rule ID: BORED_OF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'bored with'?
Suggestion: bored with
...ctual movie viewers but people who were bored of the lockdown. Thus, the movie reviews w...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 820, Rule ID: ASK_THE_QUESTION[1]
Message: Use simply 'asked' instead.
Suggestion: asked
...r. The marketing department should have asked the question about the experience of the movie viewe...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, then, thus, well, for example, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2177.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 439.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9589977221 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57737117129 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53357854461 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.44874715262 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 674.1 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More 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: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.7210210152 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.058823529 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8235294118 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.23529411765 5.70786347227 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.377684665545 0.218282227539 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11932519931 0.0743258471296 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.140762852651 0.0701772020484 201% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.194087574346 0.128457276422 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.140145935004 0.0628817314937 223% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.