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 arry other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviews 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.
A memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company when read carefully reavealed a susggestion about its plan of advertising in the upcoming year. The director suggests that the Super Screen should allocate a greater share of its budget to advertising, so that their production reaches to myriad of public through advertising. However, to properly evaluate this recommendation, few questions must be answered.
Firstly, the director claims that the percentage of positive reviews about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. More emphasis on the specificity is required. If 'specific' means one movie out of ten, then this claim is a ruse. The company should present its statistics on total number of movies produced in the last year and total 'specific' movies which showed growth in the percentage of postive reviews. Proper evaluation of this data will elucidate the decision making process.
Secondly, the director claims that lack of public awareness about the availability of good movies is the main reason of behind decrease in the audience. It must be noted that the director also claims that only specific movies witnessed growth in positive reviews while others did not. If movies which are produced by Super Screen are not as good as the director portrays them to be, then it is evident that the problem is with their production and not the audience. An impartial review of all the movies produced in the past year must be done in order to determine the actual quality of production. If movies are exceptionally good, then more efforts must be taken in advertising them by reaching out to public. Otherwise, the company should put extra efforts in uplifting the quality of their movies.
Thirdly, director also claims that number of people who attended Super Screen-produced movies was decreased in the past year. While this is true, it must be determined if this problem is faced by only Super Screen company, or it is an ubiquitous problem for all the movie production companies in this area. If former is true, then the suggestion of increasing funds for advertising is a compelling solution to tackle this problem. While in the case of latter, this suggestion will prove to be waste of money as it is empirical that public has withdrawn its interest from watching movies in cinema's.
In conclusion, proper evidence and statistical data is required to evaluate this claim of increasing the share of advertising. Claims of director seem to be speculative and does not have any empirical data to prove that this change in funding scheme will work. If all the above-mentioned clauses turn out to be in favor of the director, then the company should go ahead and allocate a greater share of its budget to advertising team. But if any of these cases go otherwise, then the company should work out different schemes to compensate the loss of audience.
Comments
e-rater score 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: 22 15
No. of Words: 485 350
No. of Characters: 2391 1500
No. of Different Words: 208 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.693 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.93 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.698 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 181 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 97 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.045 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.308 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.52 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.088 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 233, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
... by only Super Screen company, or it is an ubiquitous problem for all the movie pr...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 77.0 55.5748502994 139% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2445.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 485.0 441.139720559 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0412371134 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76277427068 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.430927835052 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 764.1 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.5838893683 57.8364921388 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.136363636 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0454545455 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.18181818182 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.300059003357 0.218282227539 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0955619423902 0.0743258471296 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100672195066 0.0701772020484 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189078806 0.128457276422 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0828669457439 0.0628817314937 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.