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 that 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 which 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 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 of the Super Scree movie Production Company, is claiming that in past year, there is lower rates of attendence to Super Screen-movies. However, since the percentage of the positive reviews has increased, he concludes that the attendence issue is not due to the quality of movies, rather it is because of less exposure to availability of such movies. Therefore, the director recommends allocating greater share of next year budget to advertising. The director's conclusion relies on assumptions which there is no clear evidence and therefore the argument is flawed. In order to be able to validate the conclusion, three questions must be answered.
First, is the increase in precentage of positive reviews this year reflects a significant increase that might affect the puplic opinion? the director never cited evidence to support this position. Perhaps, the increse in the 'precentage' of positive reviews is so little in comparison to the many other significanlty higher numbers of negative reviews. Or maybe, the higher precentage in positive reviews got higher this year in many other movies, which makes this increase with slightly lower affects. If either of these scenarios has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significanly weakened.
Furthermore, does the reviews from these movie reviewrs have an impact on people's movie attendence? Perhaps, many individuals read those reviews, but prefered to read more 'authentic' real views written by other people, and their feedback was less apealing. Maybe, they were exposed to less positive views by close friends', family members, co-workers and opinions of other amature critics on social media, who they percieved as more objective than movie viewers. If either of these scenarios has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significanly weakened.
Finally, is less attendence to the Super Screen movies is due to lack of exposure to the quality of these movies? Maybe, there is simply lower rates of watching movies during this year in general, because of many reasons such as; financial reasons, environmental, weather issues, or just a matter of preference to spend time outside the movie theater. Perhaps, many individuals prefer to watch other types of movies. If either of these scenarios has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significanly weakened.
In conclusion, the argument as it currently stands is considerably flawed due to its relience on several unwarranted assumptions. If the advertising director is able to answer the three questions above and offer more evidence, perhaps in the form of a systematic study or survey, then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viabilty of the conclusion that the decrease in attendence to Super Screen-produced movies is due to the lack of awarness that good quality movies are available. Unless additional evidence is provided, the readers of this memo should find it unpersuasive.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 472 350
No. of Characters: 2459 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.661 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.21 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.797 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 188 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 150 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 110 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.6 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.364 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.326 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.527 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 102, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are lower rates'?
Suggestion: there are lower rates
...Company, is claiming that in past year, there is lower rates of attendence to Super Screen-movies. H...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 476, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...of next year budget to advertising. The directors conclusion relies on assumptions which ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 138, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...e that might affect the puplic opinion? the director never cited evidence to suppor...
^^^
Line 9, column 36, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this movie' or 'these movies'?
Suggestion: this movie; these movies
... Furthermore, does the reviews from these movie reviewrs have an impact on peoples movi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 75, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'peoples'' or 'people's'?
Suggestion: peoples'; people's
... these movie reviewrs have an impact on peoples movie attendence? Perhaps, many indivi...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, in conclusion, in general, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 55.5748502994 128% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2536.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 472.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37288135593 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6610686524 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89763596201 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478813559322 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 809.1 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.2505380118 57.8364921388 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.761904762 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4761904762 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.09523809524 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => 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: 0.215446887629 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0631408937304 0.0743258471296 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101346936173 0.0701772020484 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123789206497 0.128457276422 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0586447842629 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 98.500998004 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.