In the given memo, the advertising director concludes that the Super Screen Movie Production Compnay should increase its budget for advertising. The director concludes based on the premise that the contents of the review, which were positive, are not reaching enought to thier prospective viewers. However, the conclsion drawn by the director may hold water, it rests on several major assumptions that, if not substantiated, weakens the persuaviness of the argument. Before we can evaluate the argument, these three questions must be addressed.
First, is the survey by the marketing team scientific? What is the sample size? Moreover, which medium was the survey conducted? It is possible that the survey sample may not have been the complete representative of the public. Perhaps, the survey involve only the people who are rather not interested in watching movies or are reluctant to provide positive answers. It is highly likely that the survey was conducted during time span which did not account to decrease in people attending the movie. Unless, we are provided with statistical data regarding the survey, its validity and claim cannot be verified. If the above is true, then the argument is significantly weakened.
Furthermore, is there only one reason for the few people attending the movie. The prompt claims that only the public's lack of interest is attributed. However, this might not be the case. Perhaps, the people would have fonud another form of entertainment to induge such as recreational activites such as cirus, theatre or sports. Also, another production companies would have emerged and delivered a super hit movie which further persuaded people to not attend their movies. If any of the above has merit, then the argument does not hold water.
Finally, is the advertising medium, currently being used, reaching out to its inteneded audience? It is highly likely that the medium used by the comapny for advertising is not serving its purpose with the eficacy demanded. Perhaps, a new medium would have emerged with better reach to the audience. Also, the technique would be novel and successful to attract potential people.Thus only increasing the budge for current form of advertising, would make no change, as the medium is at fault. If either of the above is true, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is considerably flawed.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now, is significantly flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the director is able to provide the answers to the above questions and perhaps, conduct a scientific survey along with evidences, then it will be possible to determine whether increasing advertising budget would help reach the positive review to the public.