"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."
The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company suggests that they increase the budget for advertising their movies in order to attract more audience for its movies. He recommends this based on the increase in the percentage of positive reviews by the movie reviewers while there was a decrease in the people who attended its movies last year. However, before the recommendation can be properly evaluate, one would need answers to the following questions.
Firstly, how accurate is the report from the marketing department? The director provides no details about how the report was made or how a survey was conducted. Without these details, it would be unsound to conclude that fewer people attended its movies last year. There is a possibility the marketing department chose a small sample size which was not sufficient to be representative of the reality. Furthermore, there is a possibility that the department chose a biased sample, for instance, considering only the shows that were aired in the afternoon or during the weekdays to prepare its report. If any of the above cases turn out to be true, then the advertising director's assertion that fewer people attended its movies is significantly weakened.
Secondly, what is the percentage of movies that recieved positive reviews? The director claims that the percentage of positive reviews for specific movies has increased last year and that should suffice for them to conclude that they are making good movies. However, the consideration by the director is fallacious for there is a possibility that the increase in percentage of the positive reviews was due to only a handful of movies while the rest of the movies were utterly fatuous. If this is the scenario, then the advertising director's prediction that more people would watch their movies if more budget was allocated to advertising would fall flat on its face.
Finally, what is the advertising stratagey that they are currently following? The advertising director spuriously assumes that their movies would reach wider audience if they allocate more budget to advertising. The advertising director seems to be focuing more on the budget rather than the advertising strategy. Perhaps, their advertising strategy was not sound enough which is why their movies were not able to lure more people. Or there is a possibility that their advertising strategy has not been evolving with the changing times and hence, fewer people watched their movies last year than ever before. If the problem is with the advertising strategy and not with the advertising budget, then the director's argument is significantly weakened.
Therefore, the argument, as it stands is unpersuasive as the advertising director does not furnish any information addressing the above posed questions in his argument. One will be in a better position to evaluate the argument if the director provides information addressing the above questions, perhaps, in a detailed manner leavnig no room for ambiguity
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 7 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 480 350
No. of Characters: 2487 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.681 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.181 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.819 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 188 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 144 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 115 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.857 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.821 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.357 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.573 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.172 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 704, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...t with the advertising budget, then the directors argument is significantly weakened. ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 306, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a detailed manner" with adverb for "detailed"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ddressing the above questions, perhaps, in a detailed manner leavnig no room for ambiguity
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, while, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2539.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 480.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28958333333 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68069463864 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88150758068 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.429166666667 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 803.7 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.9253348823 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.904761905 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8571428571 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52380952381 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.284818971431 0.218282227539 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0992779444122 0.0743258471296 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0892876662542 0.0701772020484 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171004143456 0.128457276422 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100483513197 0.0628817314937 160% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.