While it may be true that the production company need to allocate a greater share of its budget for awareness in public about the movies, author does not make a cogent argument to prove so. Argument is fallacious and needs to be more factual and not based on assumptions to lead to a conclusion.
First of all, the whole argument is based upon a report from company's marketing department that was taken last year that fewer people attended the Super Screen produced movies. Author here doesn't show enough factual data to back it up sufficiently. For instance, it's possible that marketing department only account for all the money related issues and not any advertisements reach to public.Than the whole argument falls down and there is no basis to conclude that budget needs to moved to advertisement department.
Additionally, author states that positive reviews for the movies are increasing. Here also the errors are visible. The positive reviews increased for some specific movies not all. Also the movie reviewers can be a niche of people following these specific movies. The link between the report of marketing department and positive reviews for specific Super Screen movies is not visible. Likes, How much part of all movies was these specific movies?
Moreover, the claim that there is nothing wrong with movies quality but with reach to prospective viewers is not supported by any type of detail. There is no mention of quality of movies, or any other specific property of movies other than generated revenue and advertisements.
Authors whole argument is based upon assumptions like one year report is enough to move budget to another department, specific movies reviews being positive means whole movies are of good quality and lastly the link of quality of movies to awareness in people is not strong. If author could cite more details of each of these assumptions then it would be a strong argument to change budget to advertisement section.But with these erroneous mistakes its lacking the cogency and filled with holes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 190, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...per Screen produced movies. Author here doesnt show enough factual data to back it up ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 392, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Than
... not any advertisements reach to public.Than the whole argument falls down and there...
^^^^
Line 3, column 392, Rule ID: SENT_START_THEM[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Then'?
Suggestion: Then
... not any advertisements reach to public.Than the whole argument falls down and there...
^^^^
Line 5, column 181, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...eased for some specific movies not all. Also the movie reviewers can be a niche of p...
^^^^
Line 9, column 276, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...s to awareness in people is not strong. If author could cite more details of each ...
^^
Line 9, column 416, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: But
... change budget to advertisement section.But with these erroneous mistakes its lacki...
^^^
Line 9, column 450, Rule ID: IT_IS[7]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...ction.But with these erroneous mistakes its lacking the cogency and filled with hol...
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'moreover', 'so', 'then', 'while', 'for instance', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.272980501393 0.25644967241 106% => OK
Verbs: 0.161559888579 0.15541462614 104% => OK
Adjectives: 0.108635097493 0.0836205057962 130% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0557103064067 0.0520304965353 107% => OK
Pronouns: 0.016713091922 0.0272364105082 61% => OK
Prepositions: 0.114206128134 0.125424944231 91% => OK
Participles: 0.0389972144847 0.0416121511921 94% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.66934754432 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0445682451253 0.026700313972 167% => OK
Particles: 0.00278551532033 0.001811407834 154% => OK
Determiners: 0.100278551532 0.113004496875 89% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0111420612813 0.0255425247493 44% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00557103064067 0.0127820249294 44% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2045.0 2731.13054187 75% => OK
No of words: 336.0 446.07635468 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.08630952381 6.12365571057 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28139028586 4.57801047555 94% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.386904761905 0.378187486979 102% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.270833333333 0.287650121315 94% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.178571428571 0.208842608468 86% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.10119047619 0.135150697306 75% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66934754432 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 207.018472906 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.497023809524 0.469332199767 106% => OK
Word variations: 51.255700415 52.1807786196 98% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 20.039408867 75% => OK
Sentence length: 22.4 23.2022227129 97% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.1955068445 57.7814097925 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.333333333 141.986410481 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4 23.2022227129 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.8 0.724660767414 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 3.58251231527 195% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 49.4833333333 51.9672348444 95% => OK
Elegance: 1.82142857143 1.8405768891 99% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.322771038097 0.441005458295 73% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.119994888904 0.135418324435 89% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0654539309936 0.0829849096947 79% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.614803822663 0.58762219726 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.154193167586 0.147661913831 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139886222707 0.193483328276 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10977130951 0.0970749176394 113% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.332523005927 0.42659136922 78% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0585753178119 0.0774707102158 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202676497017 0.312017818177 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0797981028347 0.0698173142475 114% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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: This is not the final score. 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.