"Argument Topic: "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.
The author of the argument con concludes that to get the more publicity the super screen should spend a greater share of their budget in advertising. This conclusion is based on the premises; fewer people attended super screen produced movies during past year, contents of positive reviews not reaching enough of their perspective viewers, lack of awareness among people. However, at first sight these premises seem to bolster the argument but meticulous analysis shows otherwise. The reasons for failure of argument are delineated below;
Firstly, the author said that during the past year only few people attended the super screen produced movie than in any other year. However, the exact satatstical data about the decrease in viewers is not provided without which one cannot conclude anything. Moreover, the reason for decrease in the viewers is not provided. It may be possible that the days on which movies are released by super screen are working days on which people avoid to go for a movie in place of their work
Secondly, the author states that the percentage of positive viewers has increased during past year but not reaching up to their prospective level. However, in this premise the exact data about the increase in percentage and how much is their perspective percentage not provided. It, may be possible that difference between percentage of reviews reached and their prospective be very less or very more. Thus, this is a biased premise, there are two possibilities of the increase or the decrease in difference. Therefore, based on such a premise one cannot conclude anything.
Thirdly, the author states that people are not aware about the movies produced by super screen there is not problem in quality of movies. However, in this case it may be possible that the subjects or the ideas on which movies produced by super screen contradicts with those of local people due to which they didn't prefer watching those movies produced by super screen. Moreover, it may be possible that due to production of high quality movies the charges for the movie tickets are much more which a common man cannot afford.
To sum i restate the the conclusion of the argument was totally based on fallacious assumptions which leads to the failure of the argument. However, in order to support the argument the author must have to provide more precise information regarding the number of decrease in viewers during past year, percentage of the reviews reached and factors like cost of movie ticket offered by super screen producers and on which day they release their movie. Due to lack of such information the argument fails to hold the ground.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 539, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ailure of argument are delineated below; Firstly, the author said that during the...
^^^
Line 7, column 93, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nly few people attended the super screen produced movie than in any other year. H...
^^
Line 7, column 437, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'avoid going', 'avoid gonna'.
Suggestion: avoid going; avoid gonna
...screen are working days on which people avoid to go for a movie in place of their work Sec...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 308, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...those of local people due to which they didnt prefer watching those movies produced b...
^^^^^
Line 10, column 8, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
...ich a common man cannot afford. To sum i restate the the conclusion of the argum...
^
Line 10, column 18, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...on man cannot afford. To sum i restate the the conclusion of the argument was totally ...
^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 18, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...on man cannot afford. To sum i restate the the conclusion of the argument was totally ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly, thus, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 55.5748502994 133% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2233.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 441.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06349206349 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58257569496 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52334394575 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.430839002268 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 693.9 705.55239521 98% => OK
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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.3398362116 57.8364921388 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.352941176 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.9411764706 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.05882352941 5.70786347227 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.187974919374 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0656591573986 0.0743258471296 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0788541001773 0.0701772020484 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122828036562 0.128457276422 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0613249465879 0.0628817314937 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.3799401198 107% => 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: 12.36 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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: 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.