The argument statement says that the Super screen should allocate more budget on next year on advertising to reach more number of viewers as these are not reaching to the vierwers. The evidences cited to support this argument are: Report from marketing department, more percentage of positive reviews by the movie reviewers and failing of the reviews to reach it to the viewers. However, the premises given fail to justify or strenghthen the weak argument. The reasons why this argument is rendered inconclusive are: inadequacy or authenticity of the data, fallacious assumptions and wrong analogy. The reasons are dilineated below:
Firstly, the author says that according to the report of the marketing department, during the last year the number of people who have attended Super-screen movies are fewer than the any other year, but the author hadn' t provided the exact data of the people who have attended previously and those who are attending now. So, there is inadequacy of the data. Furthermore, there is no authenticity of the data, i. e. how can we say that this data is reliable to say whether the number of viewers decreased or increased, so a proper reliable source and also the data from the other sources are also needed to corroborate the author' s argument. Moreover, one year data is not enough to say whether the viewers are decreasing in number or not. More amount of data is required. So, the argument is inconclusive.
Secondly, the author says that there is increase in percentage positive reviews by the movie reviewers but he hadn' t mentioned about the actual number of movie reviewers who reviewed the movies there. What if the number is too small? Eventually the number of positive reviews will be higher then. Also, what if the reviews of these movie reviewers are tendentious? Also, they are paid or bribed to give positive reviews in order to lure more number of viewers. So, reviews from disintersted people are required otherwise, this argument is inconclusive.
Thirdly, the author says that the public' s unawareness is the only reson for them not watching the Super-screen produced movies, but the author hadn' t mentioned about the type of movies they produce, like of what genre? What if the majority of people who like movies are young then they will love sci-fi or thriller and super-screen produce romantic or animatic movies or vice-versa can also be true. Moreover, it is also plausible that the people have no resource to watch this movie on like the multiplexes around them are too costly, or there is no multiplex around them. So, there are numerous other possibilities of notb watching the Super-screen produced movies. So, the argument is inconclucive.
So, in nutshell i would like to conclude that the argument is palagued with number of fallacious assumptions. Thatswhy it is rendered inconclusive and the author need to provide more amount of data in order to prove his statement conclusive.
The
argument
statement
says
that the Super screen should allocate more budget on
next
year
on advertising to reach more
number
of
viewers
as these are not reaching to the
vierwers
. The evidences cited to support this
argument
are: Report from marketing department, more percentage of
positive
reviews
by the
movie
reviewers
and failing of the
reviews
to reach it to the
viewers
.
However
, the premises
given
fail to justify or
strenghthen
the weak
argument
. The reasons why this
argument
is rendered
inconclusive are: inadequacy or authenticity of the
data
, fallacious assumptions and
wrong
analogy. The reasons are
dilineated
below:
Firstly
, the
author
says
that according to the report of the marketing department, during the last
year
the
number
of
people
who
have attended Super-screen
movies
are fewer than the any other
year
,
but
the
author
hadn&
#039; t provided the exact
data
of the
people
who
have attended previously and those
who
are attending
now
.
So
, there is inadequacy of the
data
.
Furthermore
, there is no authenticity of the
data
,
i. e.
how can we
say
that this
data
is reliable to
say
whether the
number
of
viewers
decreased or increased,
so
a proper reliable source and
also
the
data
from the other sources are
also
needed to corroborate the
author&
#039; s
argument
.
Moreover
, one
year
data
is not
enough
to
say
whether the
viewers
are decreasing in
number
or not. More amount of
data
is required
.
So
, the
argument
is inconclusive.
Secondly
, the
author
says
that there is increase in percentage
positive
reviews
by the
movie
reviewers
but
he
hadn&
#039; t
mentioned about the
actual
number
of
movie
reviewers
who
reviewed the
movies
there. What if the
number
is too
small
?
Eventually
the
number
of
positive
reviews
will be higher then.
Also
, what if the
reviews
of these
movie
reviewers
are tendentious?
Also
, they
are paid
or bribed to give
positive
reviews
in order to lure more
number
of
viewers
.
So
,
reviews
from
disintersted
people
are required
otherwise
, this
argument
is inconclusive.
Thirdly
, the
author
says
that the
public&
#039; s unawareness is the
only
reson
for them not watching the Super-screen produced
movies
,
but
the
author
hadn&
#039; t
mentioned about the
type of
movies
they produce, like of what genre? What if the majority of
people
who
like
movies
are young then they will
love
sci-fi or thriller and super-screen produce romantic or animatic
movies
or vice-versa can
also
be true.
Moreover
, it is
also
plausible that the
people
have no resource to
watch
this
movie
on like
the multiplexes around them
are too costly, or there is no multiplex around them.
So
, there are numerous other possibilities of
notb
watching the Super-screen produced
movies
.
So
, the
argument
is
inconclucive
.
So
, in nutshell
i
would like
to conclude
that the
argument
is
palagued
with
number
of fallacious assumptions.
Thatswhy
it
is rendered
inconclusive and the
author
need to provide more amount of
data
in order to prove his statement conclusive.