"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 this memo, advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company states that Super Screen should allocate a greater share of its budget the following year to reaching the public through advertising. To support this argument, the advertising director states that fewer people have attended the movie the previous year even after having high percentage of positive reviews by the moview reviewers. Furthermore, the director bolsters it by stating that the problem lies with the lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available to them and not with the quality of the movie. I feel that the argument is not convincing as its appears after careful scrutiny. It is flawed in various cases.
Firstly, the advertising director gives no evidence regarding the authenticity of the positive reviews given by the movie reviewers. There might cases where the positive reviews might be flawed. Moreover, false postive reviews might be given to the movie.
Secondly, the advertising director only focuses on one factor that is the postive reviews given by the moview reviewers. There can be other factors which can judge the quality of the movie like the popularity of the actors in the movie. The director fails to consider other cases which can affect the number of target rating point of the movie.
Thirdly, no information regarding the Super Screen Movie Production Company has been provided. There might be chances that the company has been infamous due to various scandals and has been blacklisted by the censor board which rates the company and the movies produced by the same.
Fourthly, there can be various cases where even the good quality movie can be leaked by the employee or someone else related to the company. Admittedly, this leak can affect the attendance of the people watching the movie legally. The advertising director might not have noticed the case of illegal distribution of the movie or piracy of the movie.
In sum, the argument is flawed in many cases. The advertising director must provide more information regarding the movie reviewers and the details of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. Also, the director should also focus on other factors which govern the quality of movie than only depending on the rating of the movie. Furthermore, the director should take care of the piracy issues of the movie seriously. Finally, after careful analysis, the company should decide upon allocating the greater share of its budget next year.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: To support this argument, the advertising director states that fewer people have attended the movie the previous year even after having high percentage of positive reviews by the moview reviewers.
Error: moview Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: Moreover, false postive reviews might be given to the movie.
Error: postive Suggestion: positive
Sentence: Secondly, the advertising director only focuses on one factor that is the postive reviews given by the moview reviewers.
Error: moview Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: postive Suggestion: positive
-------------------
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 406 350
No. of Characters: 2038 1500
No. of Different Words: 168 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.489 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.02 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.442 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 152 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.942 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.524 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.381 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.589 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.144 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, i feel, in many cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2093.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 406.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15517241379 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52399607551 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.416256157635 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 662.4 705.55239521 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.6958257627 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.6666666667 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.42857142857 5.70786347227 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.236790386678 0.218282227539 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0768927380389 0.0743258471296 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0827109845488 0.0701772020484 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12853683934 0.128457276422 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0678803435738 0.0628817314937 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 98.500998004 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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
---------------------
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.