"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 about specific Super Screen movies have increased in this year.Clearly,the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough to our prospective viewers.Thus the problem lies not in the quality of our movies but with the lack of awareness that good movies are available.Super Screen Movies should thus allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching public through advertising."
The director is trying to put forth an argument and hence a proposal that since the quality of movies made by Super Screen Movie Prod. The company is above-par as evident from the increased percentage of positive reviews in the year preceding to budget allocation, the company should, therefore, allocate more funds for advertisement.
The argument makes multiple assumptions about the quality of movies made by the company and also about the expected response from the viewers. Firstly, the director informs the readers about the increased percentage of positive reviews even though the viewership decreased. The director attributes this increase to the uniform good-quality movies the company has made over the last few years. This assumption is flawed as the percentage of positive reviews may have increased due to the fact that only avid followers of the studio or the actors involved in the film showed up to the screening and exalted the movie and its cast. While a small number of avid fans could have easily added to the discrepancy, another factor to account for the discrepancy may be the poor quality of preceding movies that led to the decrement in the number of viewers that would have otherwise shown up and given negative reviews to the new movie. Therefore a survey regarding the performance issues with the earlier movies should be made and compared with the critical response of new movie to ascertain the quality of production.
The next argument the advertising director makes is about the paucity of publicity, but the information is insufficient as such determine up to what extent was the publicity for the current film was carried out. To quantify whether advertisement spending is enough or not, budgeted spending on the publicity of earlier movies and subsequent box-office reviews should be compared with the corresponding spending and reviews of the current movie. The data hence obtained should then be used to support the assumption and hence the argument.
Also, another subtle assumption behind the argument is the advertisement director's notion that what transpired in earlier movies i.e., the increment in viewership will take place again irrespective of the quality of the future movie itself. This exhibits the ignorance of multiple variables involved in a movie's commercial and critical success. Publicity is one of these factors but it alone can't ensure the success of a movie.
The argument hence can be improved by enumerating and making such variables constant, such as producing a sequel to the previous installment of a franchise and casting the same team of actors and directors. While it still will have numerous variables such as release date, movie budget etc that should be controlled, the argument and proposal will be more strong once such variables are plugged and compared against a previous movie.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not OK
----------------
sample:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 463 350
No. of Characters: 2360 1500
No. of Different Words: 211 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.639 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.097 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.725 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 187 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 147 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.938 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.586 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.812 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.346 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.588 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.088 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, 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.
...allocate more funds for advertisement. The argument makes multiple assumptions abo...
^^^
Line 2, column 635, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
...d exalted the movie and its cast. While a small number of avid fans could have easily added to th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 928, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...iven negative reviews to the new movie. Therefore a survey regarding the performance issu...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 392, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ty is one of these factors but it alone cant ensure the success of a movie. The arg...
^^^^
Line 4, column 392, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'cants'?
Suggestion: cants
...ty is one of these factors but it alone cant ensure the success of a movie. The arg...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, may, regarding, so, still, then, therefore, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2430.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 462.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25974025974 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63618218583 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75849645174 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458874458874 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 764.1 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 61.3585772325 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.875 119.503703932 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.875 23.324526521 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.70786347227 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
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: 0.201791761919 0.218282227539 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0719766356675 0.0743258471296 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0527395773389 0.0701772020484 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115707480934 0.128457276422 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.080773853668 0.0628817314937 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 14.3799401198 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 48.3550499002 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 12.197005988 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.82 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.