"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

Essay topics:

"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.

The advertising director from the Super Screen Movie Production Company has come up with a conclusion to increase the share of the budget on advertising to reaching the public and then fetch more audience for its movies. While his conclusion is on the basis of the recent report from marketing department, some questions are yet to be addressed to come to the given conclusion from the given premises.

Firstly, the report states that fewer people have attended Super Screen produced movies in the past year than any other year. But has the same been observed with the movies from other producers? May be this year due to some alternate medium of entertainment available, viewers' preferneces might have changed resulting in overall decrease in movie viewers. In that case drawing this conclusion directly might prove naive. Also, the argument does not clarify whether the contents, quality and genre of the movies produced have remained the same. If not, then the conclusion drawn is not reasonable as there may be other factors, yet to be discovered, behind the decrease in the viewership than lack of awareness.

Though the data might be recording increasing percentage of positive reviews, but it still questionable that the dispersion of viewers have remained the same or not. Maybe only the viewers who liked the previous movies from the production house have showed up and provided positive reviews and the negative reviewers might have omitted movies last year, which is also evident from the decrease in the number of attendees. In that case, the focus should be on the improvement of the quality of movies than on advertising.

Additionally, the argument self-certifies it that the movies produced are of good quality just on the basis of increase in percentage of positive reviews, which may be because of the reasons stated in the paragraph above. Further the increase in percentage is not a reasonable data to look for while judging the quality of the movie. Rather it should be the average rating. The positive reviews might have been quantified to be rating above 3.0. So, while the median might have shifted rightwards, but the average rating of the positive reviews might have been decreased. That is also questionable. Also, the argument does not comment on whether the advertising campaign last year had the same reach than the previous year. The comparision may be viable only if all other variables are constant.

Thus, to come up with the conclusion to increase the budget for advertising is a bit naive from the given arguments. And can only be reached if the questions above are answered satisfactorily in the favor of the conclusion.

Votes
Average: 4.2 (3 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 200, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (May) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...th the movies from other producers? May be this year due to some alternate medium ...
^^
Line 13, column 335, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
...while judging the quality of the movie. Rather it should be the average rating. The po...
^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, look, may, so, still, then, thus, while

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 28.8173652695 45% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2240.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 441.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07936507937 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58257569496 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71965003554 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.437641723356 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 701.1 705.55239521 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.4077356691 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.0 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.05 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.70786347227 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => 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: 0.332662305954 0.218282227539 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108503922098 0.0743258471296 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.198015840424 0.0701772020484 282% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253284160438 0.128457276422 197% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.244999121817 0.0628817314937 390% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 98.500998004 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => 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.

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: 21 15
No. of Words: 441 350
No. of Characters: 2175 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.583 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.932 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.645 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 151 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 86 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.735 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.81 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.321 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.508 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.078 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5