In the memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company, it is stated that a greater budget share for advertising should be allocated because he believes that the contents of Super Screen's movie reviews are not reaching enough prospective viewers. The director has come to this conclusion based on the fact that during the past year, fewer people attended the movies than any other year but the percentage of positive reviews for specific Super Screen movies had increased in that period. However, there are certain questions that need to be answered before evaluating the recommendation.
What was the reason for fewer people attending the Super Screen movies during the past year than in any other year? The director assumes that it is because the public was not aware that good quality movies are available. But it is possible that the prospective viewers read the positive reviews and there are other reasons that they did not see the movie. For instance, it is possible that there was a period of recession during the past year. In such economic conditions, a majority of the population would strive to conserve their funds and cut back their entertainment budgets. If the above situation is true, allocating a greater share of the budget for advertisement is not needed and the director's argument would be weakened.
Did the absolute number of positive reviews increase during the past year? It is mentioned in the argument that the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers had increased. However, it is possible that the total number of reviews posted had decreased drastically. For instance, during the past year, the percentage of positive reviews could have increased from 30% to 40%, but the total number of reviews could have fallen from 1000 to 200. This could indicate that there was an issue with the quality of the films and not with the advertisement reach. In this scenario, the director's recommendation doesn't hold water.
What was the number of movies for which the percentage of positive reviews increased? The argument only mentions that the percentage for specific Super Screen movies had increased but doesn't mention the quantity. If the number is very small as compared to the movies for which the percentage of negative reviews had increased, it could explain the viewership discrepancy. For instance, if a single Super Screen movie had an increased percentage of positive reviews but in contrast, ten movies had an increased percentage of negative reviews, it would explain that the public had a negative outlook overall for Super Screen movies. If this is true, it indicates an issue with the quality of the movies and it would not be resolved by increasing the advertisement budget.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to the absence of several key pieces of evidence. If the advertising director is able to answer all the above questions with clarity and provide additional information in support of his claim, it might be possible to assess the merit of his recommendation.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 696, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...for advertisement is not needed and the directors argument would be weakened. Did the ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 584, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...ertisement reach. In this scenario, the directors recommendation doesnt hold water. Wh...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 609, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... scenario, the directors recommendation doesnt hold water. What was the number of m...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 185, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...c Super Screen movies had increased but doesnt mention the quantity. If the number is ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, look, so, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2588.0 2260.96107784 114% => OK
No of words: 508.0 441.139720559 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09448818898 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74751043592 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74435148312 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.391732283465 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 807.3 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.8186821019 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.636363636 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0909090909 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.09090909091 5.70786347227 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 8.20758483034 207% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.289904024416 0.218282227539 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0922068254226 0.0743258471296 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110116454258 0.0701772020484 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.18279915482 0.128457276422 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.132192935436 0.0628817314937 210% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 12.3882235529 149% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 696, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...for advertisement is not needed and the directors argument would be weakened. Did the ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 584, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...ertisement reach. In this scenario, the directors recommendation doesnt hold water. Wh...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 609, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... scenario, the directors recommendation doesnt hold water. What was the number of m...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 185, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...c Super Screen movies had increased but doesnt mention the quantity. If the number is ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, look, so, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2588.0 2260.96107784 114% => OK
No of words: 508.0 441.139720559 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09448818898 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74751043592 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74435148312 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.391732283465 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 807.3 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.8186821019 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.636363636 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0909090909 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.09090909091 5.70786347227 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 8.20758483034 207% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.289904024416 0.218282227539 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0922068254226 0.0743258471296 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110116454258 0.0701772020484 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.18279915482 0.128457276422 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.132192935436 0.0628817314937 210% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 12.3882235529 149% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.