The regional brand manager sent the following memo to the national brand manager for Sun-Beem Facial Cleanser.
“We need to institute a huge publicity campaign for the launch of Sun-Beem’s improved formula. Without an enormous media blitz, including television, radio, internet, and magazine ads, potential new customers will not be aware of our product. And previous customers will not be aware that Sun-Beem’s new, non-carcinogenic formula is on the shelves. The best way to combat the negative publicity Sun-Beem’s old formula received is to fight fire with fire, by using the media’s insatiable interest in any new news about Sun-Beem to sell the new formula. This will erase the negative connotations in the minds of former customers, and will ensure that Sun-Beem is once again the best-selling facial cleanser on the market.”
There is a statement about a advertisement campaign of a brand manager for Sun-Beem Facial Cleanser in thich they claim that they are supposed to combat negative publicitiy for old formula by means of enourmous media blitz including television, radio, internet and magazine in order to raise awareness of custormers about new formule. However, this statement is unconvincing due to devoid of information, false assumptions and inadequate way of revealing details. Before stregtening by providing these evidences and explanations, they should not take such an action.
Firstly, they assume that this advertisement campaign will surely work for them, nonetheless, they do not share any detail about how they implement their campaing. To put it another way, today's advertisements got far more creative and ingenious so that they are notably successful manipulation and getting attention, hence they should catch up these innovative trend to get notice from customers. Correspondingly, details of method is more consequential to convince people. To sum up, they should provide such details to stregthen their statement.
Secondly, there is a presumptuous trust in new formula which may lead to disappointment for them. For instance, there are cases in which firms think that their new product with its new added facilities will pacify complaints from customers, hoewever, they end up with same negative publicity since this negative publicity is sometimes not about the product itself, about ethics of company itselfd due to animal testing or overrated pricing policy. This statement have not revealed an investigation about causes of negative publicity, followingly, they cannot grant that new formula will solve their obstacles for sure. As a result, without such inquiry about this negative publicity, their statment seems much hopeful thinking rather than consequence of rational and factual reasoning.
Thirdly, they do not provide any examples to ensure that this method has worked before. In fact, this confidence should be based on some observations and they should have pointed out this experience to fortify their arguement. For instance, they may mention about an accomplishment of their rivals which have tried this strategy and they have become really successful in reaching their target customers and raising awareness of them, and disposed their company from deleterious bad reputation, as a result, this inspired them to execute this plan. To illustrate, such a citation will intensify their assertion and will be a root or an evidencefor their confidence.
In conclusion, all logical fallacies and devoid of vital details considered, this company should conduct their necessary investigations, provide evidence and examples in order to grant that this new formula with its new advertisement campaign will work to cenvince people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 28, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
There is a statement about a advertisement campaign of a brand manag...
^
Line 3, column 187, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t their campaing. To put it another way, todays advertisements got far more creat...
^^
Line 5, column 499, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ement have not revealed an investigation about causes of negative publicity, foll...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, nonetheless, really, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, as a result, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 57.0 28.8173652695 198% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2420.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 435.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.5632183908 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96510199356 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547126436782 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 749.7 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 4.96107784431 282% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 0.0 8.76447105788 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 92.1879661005 57.8364921388 159% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.25 119.503703932 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1875 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.375 5.70786347227 182% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.106379815292 0.218282227539 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0385570404153 0.0743258471296 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.06606001257 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0724547618566 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0753151535991 0.0628817314937 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 14.3799401198 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 48.3550499002 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.26 12.5979740519 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.32208582834 118% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 98.500998004 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 12.3882235529 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.9071856287 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.