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.
In the memo, it is recommended that Super Screen should allocate a large portion the budget in to advertising thereby increasing the reach to the public in order to increase the number of viewers. However, before this recommendation can be evaluated, three questions must be answered.
Firstly, Are the reviews of the movie reviewers reviews credible enough to garner in views for Super Screen produced movies? What if the movie reviewers are paid by Super Screen Movie company to give positive reviews for specific movies? It is possible that the positive movie reviews are only for those movies which cost the super screen production company a huge amount. Moreover, to recover these expenses to produce a company and get a good return on investment, the company paid the reviewers to provide positive reviews. If above scenario is true, the recommendation is significantly weakened.
Secondly, are the percentage increase of positive reviews a significant number? It is possible that the positive reviews last year were 100 and this year this reviews have increased by 10 making in it 110 positive reviews which is a 10% increase. Moreover, these increase might not be significant as compared with other production companies where in they bring about a increase of 30 to 40 percent of positive reviews. Perhaps, due to above scenario the other movie companies thrive in market in terms of viewership. Thus,a research study should be provided inculcating the number of views increased in comparison with other companies.
Thirdly, What if the reputation of the reviewers is not that good in the movie space? It is likely that the reviews given by the reviewers are not true. Perhaps the reputation of the reviewers is tarnished that even though the positive reviews are taken in an skeptical way. Perhaps the even though movie might be good, the due to movie reviewers reputation the movies fails to garner in views. If above scenario is true, the argument doesn't' hold water.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to answer three questions above and offer more evidence (perhaps in form of a systematic research study), then it will be possible to fully evaluated the feasibility of the proposed recommendation to apportion of budget for advertisement in order to bring in more viewers.
Comments
e-rater score report
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: 19 15
No. of Words: 396 350
No. of Characters: 1962 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.461 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.955 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.769 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 147 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.842 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.337 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.632 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.331 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.563 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 139, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...advertising thereby increasing the reach to the public in order to increase the n...
^^
Line 3, column 467, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...any and get a good return on investment, the company paid the reviewers to provid...
^^
Line 3, column 602, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...commendation is significantly weakened. Secondly, are the percentage increase of...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 368, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ion companies where in they bring about a increase of 30 to 40 percent of positiv...
^
Line 5, column 522, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , a
...e in market in terms of viewership. Thus,a research study should be provided incul...
^^
Line 7, column 255, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an skeptical way" with adverb for "skeptical"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...n though the positive reviews are taken in an skeptical way. Perhaps the even though movie might be...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 258, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...hough the positive reviews are taken in an skeptical way. Perhaps the even though ...
^^
Line 7, column 320, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...aps the even though movie might be good, the due to movie reviewers reputation th...
^^
Line 7, column 437, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...If above scenario is true, the argument doesnt hold water. In conclusion, the argu...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 419, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ment in order to bring in more viewers.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, thus, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2017.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 394.0 441.139720559 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1192893401 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83150579759 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.444162436548 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 640.8 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.6929817396 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.157894737 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7368421053 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.36842105263 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.175566661082 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0650245948448 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0734973214449 0.0701772020484 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0954331357782 0.128457276422 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0714099604184 0.0628817314937 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.71 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.