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 preceeding argument, the author states that Super Screen Movie Production Company should invest more in advitising to win movie viewers, citing a higher percentage of positive reviews from current viewers. While the argument may seem plausible at first glance, a closer scrutiny sheds light on a plethora of questions yet to be answered, which is crucial for the valuation of the recommendation.
To begin with, report shows that people attending movies produced by Super Screen reached a historic low. But the author does not rule out the impact of other reasons in the market. The number of movie reviewers are influenced by multifarious factors, movie quality and advertising being only part of them. For instance, it is possible that the company produce less movies in the past year, so the number of movie viewers would be naturally low. But this is not equal to the assertion that people dislike movies produced by Super Screen. Therefore, a thorough investigation for the market need to be carried to find out why fewer people are watching movies by Super Screen.
What is more, adducing the rising proportion of praise from movie reviewers, the author avers that the quality of movies made by Super Screen is not the reason why people are not watching them. This is problematic because we do not know how representative these evaluations are. Arguably, as fewer people are watching movies by Super Screen, those who are still remaining are mostly enthusiastic fans of the company, so the positive responses would be definitely high, simply because those dislike the movies are not watching at all. To fully understand people\'s evaluations for the quality of the movies, the company has to attain unbiased responses from a representative sample from all the potential audiance.
Last but not least, even if the quality of the movie made by Super Screen is high, this does not necessarily mean that spending more on advertising would solve the problem. There is a possibility that people are aware of the high quality of movies from the company, but they do not have time to watch them. Movies coming out during holidays tend to have better box office, for instance. So it is advisable for Super Screen to consider all the aspects that could have an impact on the number of reviewers.
In conclusion, while Super Screen Movie Production Company ought to take measures to attract more movie reviewers, the recommendation mentioned in the memo to infuse more expenditure on advitersing is not substantiated by the evidence proffered. Thus, it clearly does not show the necessity to spend more on propaganda.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 362, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun movies is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...it is possible that the company produce less movies in the past year, so the number ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, so, still, therefore, thus, while, as to, for instance, in conclusion, to begin with, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2193.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 434.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05299539171 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56428161445 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73013862377 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486175115207 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 691.2 704.065955056 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.8206176786 60.3974514979 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.833333333 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1111111111 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.61111111111 5.21951772744 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.393608674375 0.243740707755 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.133813445308 0.0831039109588 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0859577983746 0.0758088955206 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221188203951 0.150359130593 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0705822852117 0.0667264976115 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.