"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.
A memo from the advertising director of the super screen movie production company has stated that, although the produced movies by the company are good but due to lesser adversting about the movie, people are getting unaware of movie being produced by the company. However, while the conclusion drawn by the advertising direction may hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated would dramatically weaken the argument. Thus, the following three questions are to be addressed.
Firstly, is percentage of positive reviews credible enough? As the number of review are low, it could decrease the accuracy of a report or perhaps the reviews taken by the viewers are only taken from persons who have favourism towards the company, if either of the scenarios are proven true, the assertion of author might be hindered.
Secondly, are public not willing to watch movie even if they are aware of it? It might the scenario where people might have got influenced by the bad movies made by the company in the past, this bad influence could decrease there willingness to watch a movie, if such factor proves true, the conclusion given in the memo get hindered.
Lastly, is last year valid to compare? As it might be the case where some kind of disasater is happening. For instance, recently, a wide spread of virus lead to closure of everything and this has also affected many business such as movies, as people are not willing to go out poeple , if the above factor proves true it might weaken the conclusion.
In conclusion, the memo given by the advertising director might be true. However, as it stands, the argument lies of three unfounded assumptions, for these assumptions to hold water, the questions mentioned above are to answered.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 40, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... Lastly, is last year valid to compare? As it might be the case where some kind of...
^^
Line 7, column 283, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... people are not willing to go out poeple , if the above factor proves true it migh...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, thus, while, for instance, in conclusion, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 28.8173652695 45% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => 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: 1480.0 2260.96107784 65% => OK
No of words: 296.0 441.139720559 67% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66888490537 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 204.123752495 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540540540541 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 705.55239521 66% => 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: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 2.70958083832 369% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.1583098407 57.8364921388 156% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.333333333 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6666666667 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0833333333 5.70786347227 194% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.226452509341 0.218282227539 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0684981730622 0.0743258471296 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.105370756242 0.0701772020484 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109641047657 0.128457276422 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0990931393485 0.0628817314937 158% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 98.500998004 65% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.