"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.
To make any decision, there is a need to consider various aspects to diagnose the disease and with that only, any medication or treatment can be effective. In the given memo, the advertising director considered disparate aspects, one being a report which corroborates that the last year witnessed comparatively less people and other being an increased proportion of positive reviews. However, the writer proposed an action on fallacious grounds without answering the adequate queries arising from the above assertions.
The report presented in the argument just reported the conclusion and did not expound on any reasons behind the reduced number. There can be many interpretations inferred from the given information. It could be possible that people did not come out of their homes because of the lockdown imposed by the government to contain the spread of any deadly virus. It is also likely that the target theatres did not open as much as in the previous years due to the strike by their employees to demand salary rise. Thus, simply the numbers cannot reveal the true reason.
Further, the increased percentage of the positive reviews does not mean that the movies were liked by most the viewers. Perhaps, the reviews might be given by only limited number of fans which constitutes very less share of the overall target audience. Hence, this is immature to think that these views could not reach to others. It is probable that the other population deliberately ignored these comments and preferred movies of other production houses.
Clearly, on the above points, one cannot reach at the position to advance a suggestion but the penman concluded that their movies are fine and people are not enough aware about their films and, thus, suggested to enhance the monetary share of advertisements. As the suggestion is not based on adequate evidence, this decision may prove a blunder in the next year. There is also an option to revisit the advertising process and to assure that more buget is a neccessity otherwise, it is also possible that by just reassigning advertisement tasks to more efficient employee can bring the desired results.
Therefore, the whole statement has declarations without specifying the reasons and questions from the same needs to be answered like what was the exact reason behind the reduced attendance and the comments were given by whom? Without answering these, it is difficult to reach at the conclusion. Indeed, exploring the reasons can put the author in better position.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 312, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...t the last year witnessed comparatively less people and other being an increased pro...
^^^^
Line 7, column 201, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggested enhancing'.
Suggestion: suggested enhancing
...ough aware about their films and, thus, suggested to enhance the monetary share of advertisements. A...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, may, so, therefore, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2110.0 2235.4752809 94% => OK
No of words: 410.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14634146341 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7172789693 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 215.323595506 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551219512195 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 665.1 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.3078650826 60.3974514979 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.222222222 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7777777778 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.05555555556 5.21951772744 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.137451621993 0.243740707755 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0376489615785 0.0831039109588 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0304476035315 0.0758088955206 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0713852520696 0.150359130593 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.026289050073 0.0667264976115 39% => 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: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 100.480337079 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.