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 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 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."
The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company claims that the quality of their movie is intact and the reason for the decrease in the number of viewers is because of the lack of awareness of the people. And he suggests to allocate more money in advertising in the next year's budget. However, at first his claims seem very promising but the claims he is making, arises some questions, if not answered, the persuasiveness of the suggestion will be lost.
First of all, were the reports generated in a systematic manner? what if the report is done on the basis of a survey that is conducted only in the weekdays? The director assuming that the report is representative of the total number of people that actually come to watch the movies. However, this could be wrong. The report may have been created to deliberately show that there is a paucity in the number of spectators. Maybe the data was collected for the weekdays only and weekends were not taken into considerations to make the numbers seem lower. Therefore, it is possible that there aren't any discrepancies in the number of viewers from other years to this year and people are still watching the movies being well aware of the facts.
Secondly, does the percentage increase represent the actual number of people who reviewed the movie positively? A percent increase or decrease does not varify the real value of increase of decrease. It is possible that the positive reviews were already very low like one or two. And this year there has been one more review and the increase might jump to 100%. But this is not at all an indication that the quality of the movie is not dropped. Before assuming that the quality of the movies is the same, this question should be answered and the actual number of increase should be provided with the report.
Finally, how is it so clear that the reviews are not reaching out to the prospective spectators? Maybe the reviews are getting attention from the people but they do not trust the source at all. Maybe they know that the reviews of the movie reviewers are not entirely unbiased, and prefer the reviews of a fellow spectator more. That is why, they are not coming to the movies knowing that it is actually the quality of the movies that has degraded over the past year. The director, before making any such claim mentioned above could conduct a survey on the people of the area asking about their preference and opinions about the movie. And then, he can make better claims and suggestions about the next year's budget.
To conclude, the director makes some pretty good points on his behalf, but also arises the questions mentioned already. And, without answering those question it is hardly possible to make a compelling case about the budget allocation on the advertising department of Super Screen Movie Production Company.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 494 350
No. of Characters: 2311 1500
No. of Different Words: 219 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.714 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.678 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.463 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 165 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 106 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.478 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.711 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.292 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.498 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.083 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 235, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggests allocating'.
Suggestion: suggests allocating
...lack of awareness of the people. And he suggests to allocate more money in advertising in the next y...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s of the suggestion will be lost. First of all, were the reports generated...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 50, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a systematic manner" with adverb for "systematic"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...irst of all, were the reports generated in a systematic manner? what if the report is done on the basi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 74, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: What
...ports generated in a systematic manner? what if the report is done on the basis of a...
^^^^
Line 4, column 597, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...r. Therefore, it is possible that there arent any discrepancies in the number of view...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ovies being well aware of the facts. Secondly, does the percentage i...
^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... should be provided with the report. Finally, how is it so clear that the rev...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 12, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tions about the next years budget. To conclude, the director makes some pre...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, well, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.6327345309 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2377.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 493.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.8215010142 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52196796255 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458417849899 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 744.3 705.55239521 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.67365269461 358% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.3991556456 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.0416666667 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5416666667 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.95833333333 5.70786347227 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.227029104977 0.218282227539 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.058681226231 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0635372920822 0.0701772020484 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125515262088 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0312704381486 0.0628817314937 50% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.3799401198 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 12.5979740519 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.