Argument Topic: "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.
In the memo taken from the advertising director of the super screen movie production company it is concluded that Super screen should allocate a greater share of its budget for next year to reaching the public through advertising. However, before the budget allocation can be done the following three questions must be answered.
Firstly, How positive are the review? It is possible that the reviews are not positive at all and are tepid at best. It might be the case that the reviews are barely positive and are just on the boundary of being average. Further, How were these reviews collected? It might be the case that the reviews were collected from a non representative set of the audience or from a relatively less influential reviewer. Also it is possible that these positive reviews were fabricated by the marketing department of superscreen to attract more audience or calm the apprehensions of the stakeholders which would've potentially quit investing considering the drop in reviews a well as the number of people showing up in the superscreen's. If either of the above holds water, the conclusion drawn by the author would be dramatically weakened.
Secondly, Does the percentage of positive reviews reflect the quality of the movies? It is possible that perhaps this percentage dosen't show the whole picture. It might be possible that this percentage has increased ever so slightly that it is insignificant in the overall picture, Also considering the fact that the number of people attending the screening have reduced, this change in percentage of positive reviews holds even less weight. The author needs to provide more data on the percentage change and the number of people attending the movies over the years, otherwise the vague wording of his statements will dramatically weaken the persuasiveness of his arguement.
Finally, will more advertising and public awareness actually solve the problem? It is possible that people have found better or more convienient options and won't come back to superscreens no matter what. For instance, is it possible that people have started to prefer watching movies at the convienience of their own homes by subscribing to online streaming services like amazon prime or netflix. It is also possible that super screen movie theaters are located at the edge of the town or in isolated locations which people don't feel safe or don't have the time to commute. If the above examples holds water the conclusion of the author is significantly weakened.
In conclusion, The arguement as it stands now is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. The author needs to provide specific evidences, perhaps in the form of a systematic research study to answer the above questions and substantiate his claim of increasing the advertising budget
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 413, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...a relatively less influential reviewer. Also it is possible that these positive revi...
^^^^
Line 3, column 507, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...abricated by the marketing department of superscreen to attract more audience or ...
^^
Line 3, column 598, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: would've
...apprehensions of the stakeholders which wouldve potentially quit investing considering ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 525, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...n or in isolated locations which people dont feel safe or dont have the time to comm...
^^^^
Line 7, column 543, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ocations which people dont feel safe or dont have the time to commute. If the above ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 574, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... safe or dont have the time to commute. If the above examples holds water the conc...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, well, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.5258426966 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 33.0505617978 106% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2372.0 2235.4752809 106% => OK
No of words: 458.0 442.535393258 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17903930131 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9077854698 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489082969432 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 753.3 704.065955056 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.2868763288 60.3974514979 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.6 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.45 5.21951772744 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.197335634559 0.243740707755 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0503087709994 0.0831039109588 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0891347058915 0.0758088955206 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113126625335 0.150359130593 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10429668497 0.0667264976115 156% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.1639044944 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.