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.
The author presents his argument, contending that a greater share of its budget needs to be allocated to advertising to increase viewership of their movies. The argument seems unassailable on the surface, but has a lot of loopholes which leaves the reader questioning the conclusion.
Right off the start, it is stated that "fewer" people attended Super Screen-produced movies than last year. Quantification is neede as to how fewer. In different contexts, even a 5-10% drop might be considered substantial or even a figure of 30% may not invoke any concerns. Clarification on this point is necessary.
Next, it is mentioned that the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers has actually increased. As outlined in the previous paragraph, the quantification of the increase is vital for the reader to judge the argument and concur with the author.
Also, the author implicitly assumes that better reviews should equate to more viewers. This might not be the case. The cast and director of the movie, and their popularity amongst movieviewers have a very important role to play. Hence, a plausible explanation might be that most people might not be interested enough to watch a movie which doesn't feature their favourite actors and actresses despite positive reviews. Furthermore, the reviewers of the movie might not be the same as movie-goers. Many of the regular movie -viewers might not pay much attention to the opinions of proffesional critics. If it is so, the argument is reduced to being fallacious.
Another issue might be that the movies produce in the last year are more appealling to a certain age demographic. For example a younger audience might not appreciate a classic western style movie as an older audience. This might have led to losing a sizable chunk of a particular demographic which used to regularly watch Super Screen movies until last year. The author needs to elaborate on the "prospective viewers" and show that the movies produced were targeted at a sizable proportion of their older fan base, else the argument is defeated.
In addition, if Super Screen movies had a monopoly on the industry until last year and this year has seen the competition increase a lot more, it might explain all the points established in the argument. If it is so, no amount of advertisng will make their viewership climb as high as last year and they should reassess wether their company's movies actually performed as bad as they think it did.
In conclusion, their are several implicit assumptions which make the stated argument obstinate. Earlier paragraphs state possible explanations, but the author needs to elaborate on the points content previously for the reader to concur with the conclusion.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: Quantification is neede as to how fewer.
Error: neede Suggestion: need
Sentence: The cast and director of the movie, and their popularity amongst movieviewers have a very important role to play.
Error: movieviewers Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: Hence, a plausible explanation might be that most people might not be interested enough to watch a movie which doesn't feature their favourite actors and actresses despite positive reviews.
Error: doesn Suggestion: does
Error: favourite Suggestion: favorite
Sentence: Furthermore, the reviewers of the movie might not be the same as movie-goers.
Error: movie-goers Suggestion: movie goes
Sentence: Many of the regular movie -viewers might not pay much attention to the opinions of proffesional critics.
Error: proffesional Suggestion: professional
Sentence: Another issue might be that the movies produce in the last year are more appealling to a certain age demographic.
Error: appealling Suggestion: appealing
Sentence: If it is so, no amount of advertisng will make their viewership climb as high as last year and they should reassess wether their company's movies actually performed as bad as they think it did.
Error: wether Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: advertisng Suggestion: advertising
Error: reassess Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: viewership Suggestion: No alternate word
----------------------------
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: 12 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 447 350
No. of Characters: 2221 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.598 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.969 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.816 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 158 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 92 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.435 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.376 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.286 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.567 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.052 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 7 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 341, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...nterested enough to watch a movie which doesnt feature their favourite actors and actr...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 16, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...s they think it did. In conclusion, their are several implicit assumptions which ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, furthermore, hence, if, may, so, as to, for example, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2311.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 446.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18161434978 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5955099915 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0021349827 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513452914798 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 712.8 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.4523505169 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.47826087 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3913043478 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.34782608696 5.70786347227 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.161980192026 0.218282227539 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0483472819276 0.0743258471296 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0619943161454 0.0701772020484 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0795519191275 0.128457276422 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0618479605472 0.0628817314937 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 98.500998004 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.