- UID
- 674178
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2011-9-21
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
写A都能超时，而且找的攻击点貌似有点牵强，剩下的时间越来越紧了。。
我的提纲：
1.reviewers 的意见不代表群众的意见。
2.增大广告力度不一定增加知名度。
3.可能存在不可抗力导致票房下降。
Argument
新G题号：80
题目：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."
写作要求：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 this argument, the author recommends that Super Screen should allocate a greater share of its budget to advertising in order to increase people’s attendance. While this argument seems plausible at first glance, the recommendation based on a problematic line of reasoning is impractical after a close scrutiny.
First off, a threshold problem remains in the author’s assumption of equaling the positive reviews by movie reviewers to opinions of the multitude. Are the positive reviews of movie reviewers representative? As is universally acknowledged, a host of high-quality movies attracted a great many people albeit they hadn’t received many praises from such reviewers. On the contrary, there exist so-called splendid movies touted by reviewers being hated by the multitude instead. In this light, the reasoning is certainly unsound due to a possible variance between the reviews of reviewers and the opinions of people in appraising movies.
Even if evidence could be found against the contradiction presented above, is advertising truly useful? In the argument, the author contends that only if they concentrate more on advertising, the public’s lack of awareness will be removed. However, there’s a chance that the movies’ advertisement might be already sufficient, and the problem doesn’t lie on the public’s awareness but on the quality of movies instead. Were the author able to expound on the public’s opinion of the movies, it would be plausible to locate only one aspect of the reasons for the decrease of the attendance of the movies.
Besides, even though the foregoing reasoning could be provided with evidence, what if the decrease of the attendance of these movies owes more to people’s declining interest of watching movies or some calamity happening last year such as the depression of economy? That is to say, the movies themselves stay high-quality as well as well-known but the public would rather choose to stay at home due to a lack of money or interest in movies. That the author omits to inform us about any possible disasters doesn’t mean there isn’t any. To corroborate his reasoning, the author ought to apprise us of the existence—if any—of any particular situation.
In retrospect, this author seems rash to conclude from a line of weakly organized reasoning extracted from this argument. He should provide evidence of the public’s opinion, the effectiveness of advertisement, and the overall situations in that region in order to circumvent the weakness of his reasoning and contribute to construct a more tenable argument. Only by solving the problems presented above could he draw a more plausible as well as effective conclusion.
427words, 32min |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-10-4 11:18:14
收藏
收藏
楼主
