"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.
<span style="font-size: 19.36px;">In the memo from advertising director of Super Screen Movie Production Company, it is suggested by director that to let public know about the quality of their movies, it is required to allocate greater share of budget for advertising. The director came to this conclusion based on the premise that even there are movies are movies of good quality, public are not aware of these movies. However, in order to evaluate the recommendation proposed, the director needs to answer the following three questions.
Firstly, does the scenario happening with the company during the last year repeat even this year or any subsequent years? In other words, it is mentioned by director that fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies last year than any other year. It can so happen that during the last year, the company produced only 4 horror movies and in general since masses are not attracted towards this genre it can so happen that they did not prefer to go to cinemas to watch them. So, the plan to allocate more budget for advertising movies does not hold water in this case. Instead, they can produce movies in genre like Sci-Fi, Action, Drama etc., which many of the people these days prefer.
Secondly, does the content of positive reviews not reaching enough people mean that there is no problem with the quality of movies? In other words, there can be some factors which give the movie a good rating even though the quality of movies are bad or even vice-versa can happen. For example, let us the take case of Tom Cruise who is a famous actor and Super Screem produced a movie with him last year. Since, he has great fan following the movie prior to the release itself (may be through the trailer or the motion poster or word of mouth) gained some traction among people and had postitive reviews aggregated on Internet Movie Database (IMDB). However, after the release it is found that the movie is a disaster and the work involved in making is of poor quality. In this case, the plan to increase budget for advertising movies may not be a viable solution as people might have already noticed the gamble once.
Thirdly, when public is not aware of good movies is advertising the best solution? In other words, the director is suggesting this idea just because he's working for the administration and finance department and if the budget is allocated probably he wants to loot commission from the budget. In such a case, allocation more budget for advertising may bpt be a
The argument, as it stands now is considerably flawed due to its reliance upon several unwanted assumptions. However, if the director is able to answer and provide evidence for the above 3 questions (perhaps in form of a systematic research study), it will be possible to fully evaluate the proposed recommendation to increase allocation of budget for advertising.</span><br>
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 495 350
No. of Characters: 2334 1500
No. of Different Words: 239 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.717 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.715 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.486 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 167 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 110 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.053 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.934 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.789 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.321 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.54 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.116 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 354, Rule ID: PHRASE_REPETITION[1]
Message: This phrase is duplicated. You should probably leave only 'are movies'.
Suggestion: are movies
...on based on the premise that even there are movies are movies of good quality, public are not aware o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 150, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: he's
...or is suggesting this idea just because hes working for the administration and fina...
^^^
Line 13, column 351, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...location more budget for advertising may bpt be a The argument, as it stand...
^^
Line 13, column 361, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ore budget for advertising may bpt be a The argument, as it stands now is consid...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, as to, for example, in general, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2423.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 490.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94489795918 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70488508055 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82036755339 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.50612244898 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 762.3 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.1896347338 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.611111111 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.2222222222 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.55555555556 5.70786347227 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => 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: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186833630232 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0625162489737 0.0743258471296 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0510916037674 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102193544585 0.128457276422 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0584032360208 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.3799401198 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.