"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.
It might seem reasonable, at the first glance, to agree with the argument that Super Screen (SS) should spend more money in the next year to advertise their movies. However, in order to evaluate the argument, we needs to have a significant amount of additional evidence. This argument might end up much weaker than it seems, or it could be quite valid. In this regard, more information is needed, then analyze and decide what to learn.
Admittedly, a decreasing in the number of viewers is not a good sign. However, we need to check the scope and reliability of the report to make sure it presents for the whole audiance population. If the sample size is too small or it is not representative, its inference will not be valid.
Nonetheless, the point we should be more concerned is that the higher percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers does not depict the big picture if we do not know the population. If there are only 100 people review among the population of 100000, in this case, the percentage od positive is still higher, though using this to draw a inference about quality seems flawed as "quality" is board term. Instead, we should look further into those reviews to see what we did well and what we could improve before jumping to a concusion.
Last but not least, although the problem might be due to the lack of public awereness, increasing a greater budget in advertising may not simly solve the problem. What if the problem is not about the amount of money invested, but about how we have spent them unwisely? In this case, the argument should, instead, focus on how to improve adtertising.
In sum, the author has several key issues in support of his argument. However, without research and clarification, he could not improve his argument signigicantly. If the author truly hopes to prove that the problem is not with the quality of the movies but with the public's lack of awereness, he would need to explain his argument in detail.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 211, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'we' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'need'
Suggestion: need
..., in order to evaluate the argument, we needs to have a significant amount of additio...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 338, 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
...still higher, though using this to draw a inference about quality seems flawed as...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, look, may, nonetheless, so, still, then, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1631.0 2235.4752809 73% => OK
No of words: 343.0 442.535393258 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.75510204082 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30351707066 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74909954357 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 215.323595506 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.551020408163 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 508.5 704.065955056 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.4710931655 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.9375 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4375 23.4991977007 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.375 5.21951772744 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => 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: 0.0476545115476 0.243740707755 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.013998641614 0.0831039109588 17% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0269778239235 0.0758088955206 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.025098124204 0.150359130593 17% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0173342600721 0.0667264976115 26% => 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: 11.7 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.8420337079 120% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 12.1639044944 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.38706741573 93% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 100.480337079 67% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.