The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company suggests to increase advertising budget for next year in order to create awareness among people about movies released by the production house. He has given a report which claims that due to lack of effective advertisement, people are unaware about availability of good quality movies even though positive movie reviews have ameliorated for certain movies. The director's claim is unwarranted and needs to provide answers to below questions to bolster his claim.
Firstly, the director uses vague terminology to describe the changes that have occurred in past few years. The director states that fewer people attended their movies but he does not quantify how many fewer people attended the movie. Whether two thousand or twenty thousand fewer people attended movie? Director needs to present figures in order to back his claim. Also, he avers that percentage of positive reviews have increased in past year but does not specify the numbers and duration for which it had increased.
Secondly, the director obscures his claim by mentioning that positive reviews have increased for specific movies but by not specifying for which movies. It might be possible that positive reviews have increased for fewer percentage of movies compared to overall number of movies released by production house. In that case advertising reviews won’t help to attract more audiences to Super Screen produced movies. Also, director needs to specify what kind of critics gave positive review to the Super Screen produced movies. Nowadays many critics are partisan and can be paid to write good reviews. In such scenario’s audience are clever enough to identify whether a review is genuine or not by reconciling it with reviews of other genuine critics.
Lastly, the director claims that reviews are not reaching to target audience but he does not justify his claim. Neither does he delineate what are the current mediums of advertisement. It is unwise to relate fewer audience attending movies to ineffective marketing. It might be the case that movies are released on working days or movies that are being produced have same genre and are not creative or innovative enough to attract audience. The director needs to answer such questions before establishing any such relation. Also, to understand the core of problem director can directly take feedback from target audience in form of online questionnaire. In this way, the director can be sure that he is not missing out on any critical piece of information.
Director has arrived to a conclusion without any robust statistical data backing it and has advised production house to increase the budget for marketing. The conclusion is abstract and misleading as he has not considered any other factors which might have affected the number of people attending movies produced by Super Screen Movie Production Company. Thus, the director’s argument is vague and unjustified. He needs to answer above questions and come up with facts and figures to back his claim. So, according to me recommendation provided by director is not reasonable.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 503 350
No. of Characters: 2593 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.736 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.155 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.64 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 207 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 157 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 111 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.346 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.211 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.346 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.482 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.154 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, thus, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 55.5748502994 128% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2661.0 2260.96107784 118% => OK
No of words: 502.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30079681275 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75594783842 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.440239043825 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 845.1 705.55239521 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => 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: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.3171108142 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.346153846 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3076923077 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.84615384615 5.70786347227 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.254960720449 0.218282227539 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0738959898684 0.0743258471296 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0661307905141 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154424269496 0.128457276422 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0325836051281 0.0628817314937 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 98.500998004 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.