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’s argument that the more budget should be allocated to advertising to attract more people is questionable. Several questions that need to addressed include accessibility of their movie, feedback of the review received, and quality of their movies.
First, the author suggested that more budget should be distributed to advertising because few people have attended their movie compared to any other years. The author should look into the percentage of decrease and demographic change. Also, the author noted an increase in the review. With advanced technology and online streaming, it could be that more people are watching movies online, rather than going to cinemas. Therefore, the author should look into the demographic changes in term of movie watching and through what platform the viewers are gravitating.
Second, the author believed that their movies were not reaching to the public even though there was an increase in the content reviews. The author should also look into the kinds of review they received. If they received more negative reviewed, it was not surprise that there were less people attending their movies. Hence, author should analyze the feedback their the content reviewers provided before making a decision on how they should distribute their budget.
Third, the author also believed their movies were of good quality but could reach the public is the reason that more money should allocated to advertising. The author should reflect upon his belief by examining the feedback from the content reviewers. Through that process, the author would clearly understand if they should do more to improve the quality of their movies, or using a different channel to show their movies.
In sum, the author should address several questions of the current demographic pattern in accessing and watching movies, feedback from the content reviewers and whether they should allocate more funds to improve quality of their movies before making a decision to spending the budget on advertising.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- some how duplicated to argument 1
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 318 350
No. of Characters: 1663 1500
No. of Different Words: 144 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.223 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.23 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.432 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 147 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 90 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 60 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.2 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.518 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.432 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.617 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 282, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ed, it was not surprise that there were less people attending their movies. Hence, a...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, look, second, so, therefore, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 16.3942115768 6% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1714.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 318.0 441.139720559 72% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38993710692 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54723969156 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 204.123752495 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.468553459119 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 705.55239521 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.831651716 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.266666667 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.2 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0824041478589 0.218282227539 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0371372832297 0.0743258471296 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0340275715767 0.0701772020484 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0580741489155 0.128457276422 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0210999721155 0.0628817314937 34% => 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: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 98.500998004 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.