"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 author concludes that allocating a greater share of its budget to advertising and publicity would help them to reach the public, and inform them about the good quality of movies that are being produced by the Super Screen Movie productions. They have reached this conclusion because they feel that people are not aware of the good availability of good quality films as only a few people had attended the Super Screen-produced movies last year. Although the cited pieces of evidence seem logical and probable, the conclusion relies on certain doubtful assumptions that do not lend credible support for the argument. Hence the argument seems logically unconvincing in several aspects.
Firstly, the author assumes that since only a few people attended the movies last year, they may not be aware of the good quality of films available. The author, however, fails to answer questions such as how many normally attend the movies and how many attended last year? If the number of people who normally attend the movie the last year is just one or two persons less as compared to any other year, then the entire purpose of the argument would be undermined. Also were all the movies attended by fewer people or was it only just one specific movie. Perhaps, the people may have not loved one particular film and hence they did not attend it, but the overall attendance of all movies is high. To strengthen the argument, the author should have provided additional information about the number of people who attended the movies as well as for how many movies was the attendance low.
In addition to this, the author assumes that most of their movies have received a positive response and thus they must be producing high-quality movies. The author mentions that the percentage of positive reviews about some 'specific' movies has increased. Perhaps only a very few of their produced movies may be receiving a positive response. Most of their movies might not be liked by the people hence the author cannot reach a hasty conclusion that all of their films are of great quality. The author should probably survey the types of responses that are received for all the movies that they produce.
Finally, the author assumes that people are not aware that movies of good quality are available. Perhaps, most people are in fact already aware that the majority of the films are of bad quality and hence they do not attend these movies. Even if it is assumed that these movie productions produce high-quality films, one cannot rule out the possibility that people would be using dishonest means such as pirated websites to watch these films. Therefore, they can save their money by watching these movies that are available free of cost on their mobiles or laptops. Thus allocating a greater share of its budget would be considered futile. Instead, the company should dedicate its time and resources to finding these false websites.
To sum up, the argument consists of some obvious fallacies and loopholes. To strengthen the argument the author should have provided additional information about the number of people who have attended the movies last year, or the type of responses that are recieved for all types of movies. He should have also provided any other factors which could be attributed to the few people attending the movies last year. But in the absence of this data, the argument relies on doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 581 350
No. of Characters: 2819 1500
No. of Different Words: 225 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.91 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.852 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.425 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 206 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 135 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 94 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.24 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.454 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.72 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.339 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.521 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.122 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 627, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... lend credible support to the argument. Hence the argument seems logically unconvinci...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 279, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... and how many attended last year? If the number of people who normally attend the...
^^
Line 3, column 374, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[1]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...st year is just one or two persons less as compared to any other year, then the en...
^^
Line 3, column 466, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...se of the argument would be undermined. Also were all the mvies attended by a fewer ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 699, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: To
...verall attendance of all movies is high.To strengthen the argument, the author sho...
^^
Line 5, column 252, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Perhaps
...bout some specific movies has increased.Perhaps only a very few of their produced movie...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 493, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...all of their films are of great quality.The author should probably conduct as surve...
^^^
Line 7, column 270, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this movie' or 'these movies'?
Suggestion: this movie; these movies
...hese movies. Even if it is assumed that these movie production produce high quality of film...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 414, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e would be using dishonest means such as pirated websites to watch these films. T...
^^
Line 7, column 652, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Instead,
...f its buget would be considered futile. Instead the company should dedicate ithier time...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 747, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ources into finding these false websites . To sum up, the argument consists of ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, thus, well, as for, in addition, in fact, such as, as well as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 13.6137724551 162% => OK
Pronoun: 50.0 28.8173652695 174% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2906.0 2260.96107784 129% => OK
No of words: 592.0 441.139720559 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90878378378 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.93265142912 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46680339064 2.78398813304 89% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.402027027027 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 919.8 705.55239521 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
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: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.7094884398 57.8364921388 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.090909091 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.9090909091 23.324526521 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.70786347227 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 11.0 5.25449101796 209% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.203437382329 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.068724955524 0.0743258471296 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0520823921365 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127116904424 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0399456934578 0.0628817314937 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 98.500998004 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.