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.
Well the recommendation is regarding the veiwership for the Super screen Movie Production company , which has decreased last year. And to mitigate the issue the advertising director is suggesting for exra funds as he is assuming the issue is with the advertising front of it, and needs more portion on the budget next year for better advertisement. It does looks convincing provided the assumptions evident in the argument are actually analysed and reviwed before making the recommendation.
First assumption present is regarding the recent report, which says count of people viweing the movies of concerned production has decreased. There is no information supporting for this claim which guarantees reduced count is due to the decrement in popularity of movies of this production house. There are numerous factores which can cause this decline, namely count of movies relaesed compared to previous years which can decrease the count of people coming. This count would have been more helpful if it says the proportion of viewing people per movie has changed. Then it would have strongly implicated that there is certainly the issue with the quality or content of the movie.
Second, the point regarding the percentage of positive reviews, for this to be valid we need to make sure we are comparing this percentage between the years when we have same total number of people viewing. It could be highly uncertain to conclude on the quality of the movie by comparing this parameter. It would be helpful to review those positive reviews, and to check whether those positive reviews are coming for same aspects of the movies or they are for some other aspect, which can happen if this the content displayed the movie might have changed and which is not a attractive one for the mass public. In this view it's not the advertising which has caused the decrease it instead the content which has changed.
Thirdly, the generalization of director regarding good movies and direct proportionality with the amount of viewers. Movie topics could be widely varying and could be attractive to different set of people and their preferences. It would be naive to say good movies will always provide you mass viewership. In addition to the content , its possible the cast used in movies might have changed. Maybe a new actor has been introduced who doesn't have that fan base to attract the public or might the cast used might have someone
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 17 15
No. of Words: 404 350
No. of Characters: 1988 1500
No. of Different Words: 196 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.483 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.921 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.601 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 101 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 66 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.765 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.161 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.529 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.328 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.525 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.116 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 98, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...he Super screen Movie Production company , which has decreased last year. And to m...
^^
Line 1, column 464, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...are actually analysed and reviwed before making the recommendation. First assump...
^^
Line 2, column 77, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...g the recent report, which says count of people viweing the movies of concerned p...
^^
Line 3, column 573, 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
...vie might have changed and which is not a attractive one for the mass public. In ...
^
Line 3, column 624, Rule ID: IT_IS[6]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...e one for the mass public. In this view its not the advertising which has caused th...
^^^
Line 4, column 332, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...s viewership. In addition to the content , its possible the cast used in movies mi...
^^
Line 4, column 434, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ybe a new actor has been introduced who doesnt have that fan base to attract the publ...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 454, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...been introduced who doesnt have that fan base to attract the public or might the ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, if, look, may, regarding, second, so, then, third, thirdly, well, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2019.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 403.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00992555831 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48049772903 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67112795541 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491315136476 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 622.8 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.0657989548 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.764705882 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7058823529 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52941176471 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.144202937617 0.218282227539 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0562509562484 0.0743258471296 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0480751115687 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0967518301984 0.128457276422 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0304792440268 0.0628817314937 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.