A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio.
"We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10% in order to ensure a quality product. As you know, we are working with a first-time director, whose only previous experience has been shooting commercials for a shampoo company. Since the advertising business is notoriously wasteful, it stands to reason that our director will expect to be able to shoot take after take, without concern for how much time is being spent on any one scene. In addition, while we have saved money by hiring relatively inexperienced assistant producers and directors, this savings in salary will undoubtedly translate to greater expenditures in paying the actors and unionized crew overtime for the extra hours they will spend on the set waiting for the assistant directors and producers to arrange things. If we don't get this extra money, the movie is virtually assured to be a failure."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The movie producer in his memo has made certain requests which rely heavily on unsubstantiated claims being made. No doubt, a number of assumptions have been made to further his/her point of increasing the funding by 10% in order to deliver a quality product. The most basic assumption in itself is that an increase in funding is necessary to ensure a quality movie. There are many aspects to a movie which contribute to its quality like acting, storyline, etc but an assumption on the causal relationship of funding and quality is being made. It can very well be the case that inspite of increasing the funding by 10% the movie still ends up being a subpar quality product.
The producer further makes an assumption regarding the working style of the diretor on board. Since the director comes from the advertising business, it is assumed that his work style is wasteful. The statement that the advertising business is wasteful is a liberal assumption itself. But to further assume that the working style of the movie's director will also be wasteful is also far fetched. The director, while directing the movie, might change his work style to suit the demands of the movie industry. In case this assumption of the producer is proven false then the request for 10% additional funding would be entirely unnecessary. The movie might be finished with the available funding itself.
The producer also assumes that the inexperienced assistant directors and producers which have been hired to work on the project would be necessary inefficient and will resultantly cost the project more money. Firstly there is an assumption that the relative inexperience will translate to longer time required to arrange sets. Even if this assumption is proven correct there is the further assumption that the actors and unionized crew will have to wait for such arrangments to be made and therefore will have to be paid overtime. This whole argument is based on various assumptions, even one of which proven to be false will make the whole argument void. If the relative inexperience does give rise to delayed arrangements on set it is not necessary that the actors and crew have to work overtime, the arrangments can be so scheduled beforehand so that nobody has to work overtime and zero waiting time is accrued. Also, it is assumed that even if overtime has to be paid it much more than the money saved on hiring the relatively inexperience staff on board. If this assumption is proven false then again the demand for increase in funds will not have its thrust.
All in all, the move producer's demand for 10% increase is based on a number of assumptions regarding the possible problems which might be encountered once the filming begins. Most of the problems ennumerated arise out of the expected ineffciency and wasteful methods of the director or assistant director and producers. This assumptions can either prove right or wrong. But in case they prove wrong then the increase in funding is absolutely frivolous. In any case the increase in funding does not necessarily assure a quality product.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: It can very well be the case that inspite of increasing the funding by 10 the movie still ends up being a subpar quality product.
Error: inspite Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: subpar Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: The producer further makes an assumption regarding the working style of the diretor on board.
Error: diretor Suggestion: director
Sentence: Even if this assumption is proven correct there is the further assumption that the actors and unionized crew will have to wait for such arrangments to be made and therefore will have to be paid overtime.
Error: arrangments Suggestion: arrangements
Sentence: If the relative inexperience does give rise to delayed arrangements on set it is not necessary that the actors and crew have to work overtime, the arrangments can be so scheduled beforehand so that nobody has to work overtime and zero waiting time is accrued.
Error: arrangments Suggestion: arrangements
Sentence: Most of the problems ennumerated arise out of the expected ineffciency and wasteful methods of the director or assistant director and producers.
Error: ineffciency Suggestion: inefficiency
Error: ennumerated Suggestion: enumerated
----------------
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK, or can be more clear: Need to compare the money saved for hiring relatively inexperienced assistant producers and directors (we called it A), and the money paying the actors and unionized crew overtime for the extra hours (we call it B), if A is more than B, still it is meaningful.
----------------
flaws:
Need to argue against the conclusion always. For this topic it is:
If we don't get this extra money, the movie is virtually assured to be a failure.
we may argue: Any movie does not solely depends on funding, there are several other factors which contribute in the success of a movie.
-------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 520 350
No. of Characters: 2523 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.775 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.852 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.682 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 170 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 95 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 58 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.37 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.3 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.487 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.111 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 561, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... quality is being made. It can very well be the case that inspite of increasing t...
^^
Line 3, column 338, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'movies'' or 'movie's'?
Suggestion: movies'; movie's
...er assume that the working style of the movies director will also be wasteful is also ...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 321, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: These
...or or assistant director and producers. This assumptions can either prove right or w...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, regarding, so, still, then, therefore, well, while, as to, no doubt, in any case
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => 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: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2572.0 2260.96107784 114% => OK
No of words: 519.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95568400771 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7730044521 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72243221604 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 204.123752495 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.421965317919 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 824.4 705.55239521 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.808355848 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.166666667 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.625 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.625 5.70786347227 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.242210157106 0.218282227539 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0813784579787 0.0743258471296 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0531108181266 0.0701772020484 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163647458639 0.128457276422 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0655083470151 0.0628817314937 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 11.49 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.