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 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 memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company does not show the proper reasoning for the decline in the public watching their movies. There are many other reasons which are unstated in the memo which needed to be clear before taking any decision.
The report from the marketing department says that fewer people have attended Super Screen produced movies in the past year when compared to any other year. The reason for the decline in the number of viewers had not been cearly mentioned. There may be number of reason for the decline in the number. The release date for the movie may not be suitably choosen or the time on which the movie is telecasted in Multiplex theatres may not be peoper. Generally, viewers may not found the timing of movie suitable with their schedule. The marketing department should look at the other reason for the company to come to any conclusion.
The memo shows that the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers have increased during the past year. Here, it is not shown the number of movies released during the past when compared to other years. It may happen that Super Screen has produced only one movie in the past year which has got positive reviews leading to increase in percentage of positive reviews. Also, the reviewers who have given positive reviews may not seem legitimate to the audience. In general, people follow one or two critics only which have given legitimate review. Getting positive reviews form unlegitimate reviewers doesn't lure the people to watch movies. The company should focus on the legitimate reviewers who are followed by viewers to increase their viewer number.
As said by the director, the problem is with the public lack of awareness about good movies and they should allocate a greater share of its budget in the coming year to reach more public through advertising. If the contents of the movie is good, it doesn't require large amount of advertising. Good movies always have a demand in the society and viewers can find time to watch this movies. The company should look for legitimate critics to review the quality of movies and find the other necessary reasons.
In sum, this memo has many unstated question which needs to be answered before taking any decisions. The advertising director should find other reasons to compel the committee to take any decision for increasing the viewer number.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 272, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...er Screen has produced only one movie in the past year which has got positive rev...
^^
Line 5, column 606, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ive reviews form unlegitimate reviewers doesnt lure the people to watch movies. The co...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 250, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...f the contents of the movie is good, it doesnt require large amount of advertising. Go...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 377, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...iety and viewers can find time to watch this movies. The company should look for leg...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'so', 'in general']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.26376146789 0.25644967241 103% => OK
Verbs: 0.178899082569 0.15541462614 115% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0871559633028 0.0836205057962 104% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0321100917431 0.0520304965353 62% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0183486238532 0.0272364105082 67% => OK
Prepositions: 0.119266055046 0.125424944231 95% => OK
Participles: 0.0550458715596 0.0416121511921 132% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.38524470465 2.79052419416 85% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0344036697248 0.026700313972 129% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.128440366972 0.113004496875 114% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0275229357798 0.0255425247493 108% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0229357798165 0.0127820249294 179% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2423.0 2731.13054187 89% => OK
No of words: 408.0 446.07635468 91% => OK
Chars per words: 5.9387254902 6.12365571057 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.57801047555 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.375 0.378187486979 99% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.252450980392 0.287650121315 88% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.161764705882 0.208842608468 77% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0882352941176 0.135150697306 65% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38524470465 2.79052419416 85% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 207.018472906 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.426470588235 0.469332199767 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 45.3410573562 52.1807786196 87% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 19.4285714286 23.2022227129 84% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.1779409338 57.7814097925 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.380952381 141.986410481 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4285714286 23.2022227129 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.285714285714 0.724660767414 39% => More Discourse Markers wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 44.6736694678 51.9672348444 86% => OK
Elegance: 1.91 1.8405768891 104% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.530973871002 0.441005458295 120% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.154218583552 0.135418324435 114% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.110024575026 0.0829849096947 133% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.59980691922 0.58762219726 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.124030379551 0.147661913831 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.226039027865 0.193483328276 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130859915199 0.0970749176394 135% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.475797715411 0.42659136922 112% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.10408095111 0.0774707102158 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.36731438183 0.312017818177 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0885540342624 0.0698173142475 127% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.33743842365 168% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 14.0 6.46551724138 217% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 5.36822660099 56% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.82389162562 142% => OK
Total topic words: 21.0 14.657635468 143% => 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.