The advertising director of The Super Screen Movie Production Company suggests that the budget of advertising should be increased next year in order to be successful in attracting larger masses. This recommendation is based on the increase in positive reviews of certain movies that have been higher than that of any previous years. However, before this recommendation can be fully evaluated, three questions must be answered.
Firstly, are the positive movie reviews genuine and from the people who have actually seen the movie? In other words, what is the evidence that these movie reviews are not fake reviews or duplicate reviews by the same people? It is hard to believe that the number of positive reviews keep increasing even when the viewership is going down. Therefore, it is possible that the handful customers who come for the shows are forced by the staff to put up multiple positive reviews in order to attract and convince larger audiences to come. In that case, the conclusion drawn by this suggestion will not hold any water.
Moreover, are these "good quality" movies of actual interest to the public? In short, it may be possible that the subjects or genre of the movies priduced by Super Screen are not keeping up with current trends and interests of the people. The reviews are reflected only for certain movies, hence strengthening the case that majortity of the content does not appeal to the mass. Consequently, no amount of advertising will be successful in attracting audiences. It can also be the case that the movies, even though they have superior content, lack in sound effects, star cast or added features such as animations or VFX. Hence the customers might not see any value in investing time and money in obtaining a sub-par viewing experience. If any of these scenarios has any merit, then the answer to the problem is not simply advertising. A broader approach in terms of enhancement of content and/ or additional features must be taken to get people to attend the movies.
Lastly, is the audience preferring other mediums of entertainment as opposed to going to movie theatres? Admittedly, the Corona Virus pandemic has caused a paradigm shift is the way people consume content and view entertainment. It may be the case that the audiences now do not show much interest in physically going to theatres to watch movies on the big screen. It is possible that the audience have made a shift to OTT movies and series on platforms such as Netflix, which they can enjoy from the comfort of their own homes. This will, in fact, not be a problem limited to Super Screen Movie Production Company, and therefore would not be solved solely by increasing advertising expenses. Hence in this scenario, the recommendation will be siginificantly weakened.
In conclusion, this recommendation as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance of several unwarranted assumptions. If the advertising director is able to answer the above mentioned questions and provide evidence, perhaps in terms of a detailed study, then it will be possible to completely evaluate the viability of the recommendation to increase advertising budget for the next year.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 7 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 528 350
No. of Characters: 2597 1500
No. of Different Words: 245 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.794 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.919 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.774 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 187 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 142 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 102 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.957 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.068 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.739 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.273 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.273 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.049 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 630, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ded features such as animations or VFX. Hence the customers might not see any value i...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 692, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ely by increasing advertising expenses. Hence in this scenario, the recommendation wi...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, consequently, first, firstly, hence, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, in conclusion, in fact, in short, such as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 55.5748502994 128% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2669.0 2260.96107784 118% => OK
No of words: 528.0 441.139720559 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05492424242 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79356345386 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87568051494 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 257.0 204.123752495 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486742424242 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 833.4 705.55239521 118% => 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: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.8577047266 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.208333333 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.95833333333 5.70786347227 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 8.20758483034 207% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => 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: 0.209328218128 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0581509161744 0.0743258471296 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0629103798833 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118165772918 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0464501821454 0.0628817314937 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.01 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.