Super Screen Synthesis Essay
The argument makes indefensible and unjustified assumptions regarding the reduction of audiences of Super-Screen production movies. Taken as a whole, these unwarranted assumptions deliver a highly distrusted assertion. Indeed, if these unstated assumptions do not hold true, the argument entirely collapses.
The argument puts its assertions according to an unaddressed report, the validity of which is not justified. It is not obvious whether the report truly represents the society. In statistical terms, the sampling must be random to eliminate the possibility of biases. The report might have been prepared from the data that concentrated in a particular neighborhood, and thus not all the residents of the city obtain the equal chance of being represented …show more content…
First of all, the argument does not mention the references of the reviews. Reviews might be from a variety of channels or could be produced from only one. Evidently, different sources employ a variety of perspectives to criticize a movie and different critics seek for different elements inside a movie. Therefore, while critics from a channel might adore a movie, the others might not even rate it as qualified. Even if reviews are not susceptible to biased ideas from one channel, it does not mean that audiences must appreciate what reviewers listed as admirable. The contents that fascinate movie viewers might have distanced from the contents that were displayed in the last year’s movies even though movies were praised by reviewers. For example, the witch is a movie that critics regarded highly last year but could not satisfy viewer’s taste. A survey could help to demonstrate the people’s opinion. If the opinions showed consistency and were parallel to what reviewers indicated, the claim of the argument that was built on this critics-viewers parallelism assumption would survive; otherwise, the claim is flawed and the company must end its tendencies toward advertising and instead revise the contents of the
The argument puts its assertions according to an unaddressed report, the validity of which is not justified. It is not obvious whether the report truly represents the society. In statistical terms, the sampling must be random to eliminate the possibility of biases. The report might have been prepared from the data that concentrated in a particular neighborhood, and thus not all the residents of the city obtain the equal chance of being represented …show more content…
First of all, the argument does not mention the references of the reviews. Reviews might be from a variety of channels or could be produced from only one. Evidently, different sources employ a variety of perspectives to criticize a movie and different critics seek for different elements inside a movie. Therefore, while critics from a channel might adore a movie, the others might not even rate it as qualified. Even if reviews are not susceptible to biased ideas from one channel, it does not mean that audiences must appreciate what reviewers listed as admirable. The contents that fascinate movie viewers might have distanced from the contents that were displayed in the last year’s movies even though movies were praised by reviewers. For example, the witch is a movie that critics regarded highly last year but could not satisfy viewer’s taste. A survey could help to demonstrate the people’s opinion. If the opinions showed consistency and were parallel to what reviewers indicated, the claim of the argument that was built on this critics-viewers parallelism assumption would survive; otherwise, the claim is flawed and the company must end its tendencies toward advertising and instead revise the contents of the