"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 above statement is given by the director of Super Screen Movie Production Company. According to the director, only very few people actually watched the movied produced by Super Screen, but there is an increased positive response about the movies which is given by movie reviewers and critics. The director claims that the main and only reason behind not many people watching the super screen produced movies is because they do not know about these good quality movies being released. And the director affirms that the only way out of this jam, is to dedicate more funds from the budget in adverstising so that people become aware of the movies that are being relased by super screen. The statement is riddled with numerous logical fallacies and has several unwarrented assumptions upon which I will be shedding light upon.
To begin with, they claim that only fewer people watching the movies and many of the positive reviews that has been recorded is given by the movie critics. Fact the first, there is no relavent statistics provided and there is not one iota of evidence to prove that their claim is true. The number of people who are living in that particular locality is not known, and all the calculations is based on that. The number of movie critics and the number of viewers is not given in the statemnt, which very essential to make such a claim in the first place.Hence, it cannot be said that there is an increase percent of movie critics and reduced percent of viewers watching the film.
Furthermore, even if that claim is true, it cannot be said that the sole reason for the reduced viewers is due to that posit that many people did not know about the release of movies produced by Super Screen. What if it is maybe becasuse of the fact that people in that particular locality have moved to another region? What if there was an alternate option like Netflix or Amazon Prime where there are more captivating and intriuging movie options? What if people had other interests like watching series and they preferred that more than movies as each episode is not as long as a movie? It could any of the reasons and it cannot be stated that people not knowing about the movies is the only reason behing the plummeting views.
Thirdly, they claim its a good quality movie. What is a good quality movie and who deciedes its a good quality movie? What is the basis for this claim?what are the factors that are considered for a movie to be of good quality? Is it the audio and video quality that make it be called a "good quality" movie? It is very vague of them to say that their movie alone are of good quality
Lastly, they claim that they can increase the number of viewers by allocating more money to advertising about the super screen produced movies. This hold true only if the reason for the decreased number of viewers is that they did not know about them , which may not be the case here. It cannot be assured that the situation will reverse by implementing their suggested solution.
In conclusion, there are numerous loopholes and a sundry of unwarrented assumptions and logical fallacies in the argument.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 11 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 11 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 553 350
No. of Characters: 2530 1500
No. of Different Words: 218 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.849 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.575 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.269 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 162 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 110 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.043 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.411 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.319 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.589 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.155 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 553, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Hence
...to make such a claim in the first place.Hence, it cannot be said that there is an inc...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 451, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ptivating and intriuging movie options? What if people had other interests like watc...
^^^^
Line 7, column 21, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...lummeting views. Thirdly, they claim its a good quality movie. What is a good qu...
^^^
Line 7, column 93, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...s a good quality movie and who deciedes its a good quality movie? What is the basis...
^^^
Line 7, column 285, 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
...nd video quality that make it be called a 'good quality' movie? It is v...
^
Line 9, column 251, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ers is that they did not know about them , which may not be the case here. It cann...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, furthermore, hence, if, lastly, may, so, third, thirdly, in conclusion, to begin with, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 43.0 19.6327345309 219% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 31.0 13.6137724551 228% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 52.0 28.8173652695 180% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2602.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 551.0 441.139720559 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.722323049 5.12650576532 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84493438435 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.3946287827 2.78398813304 86% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.404718693285 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 822.6 705.55239521 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.6044011083 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.272727273 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0454545455 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.77272727273 5.70786347227 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.20758483034 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => 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: 0.244377623429 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0830768652433 0.0743258471296 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0845347623991 0.0701772020484 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117938429689 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105407823414 0.0628817314937 168% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.39 12.5979740519 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.83 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 98.500998004 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.