Following appeared as advertising agency's promotional brochure.
"Our service, which includes both designing and placing advertisement, is by far the most effective in the industry. For instance, we recently designed and placed a series of advertisements for an apparel company using a professional golfer as a spokesperson. Before the series of ads, a survey showed that only 8% of people who described themselves as non-golf fans had heard of the apparel company. After the series of ads, despite the golfer making national headlines by becoming the youngest golfer ever to win a major professional tournament, over 80% of people from a second survey had heard of the apparel company."
The promotional brochure of an advertising agency states that the agency is most effective in the Industry. To argument substantiates this with the example of the recent advertisement campaign managed by the agency. The agency used a professional golfer as a spokesperson for the advertisement , and the agency undertook the surveys before beginning and after the end of the campaign to evaluate the effectiveness of the campaign. Although the argument tries to prove that the agency is most effective in the industry, I find the argument very much weak. I have illustrated the gaps in the argument in the paragraphs below.
The biggest flaw in the argument is that it does not use same yardstick to measure the effectiveness of the argument. Before beginning of the campaign the agency used the population of non-golf fans to evaluate the brand awareness. However after the series of ads, the agency used the whole population to evaluate the brand awareness. It could have been the case that the brand might have already been very much popular among golf fans. In such scenario, it is not possible to evaluate the effectiveness of campaign as we do not the proportion of the golf fans in total population of survey.
The argument states that the advertisement agency is most effective in the Industry. However it uses only the example of past performance of the agency to substantiate the claim. In order to prove that the agency is most effective, the company needs to present the data related to other firms as well. The argument does not make any such efforts. The agency needs to present the data about all the important parameters of all the competitors to prove that it is most effective advertising firm.
Moreover the argument uses only one example of the past performance of the company to prove its most effective status in the Industry. The performance of the agency over a period is essential to decide about the overall the performance of the agency.
Thus argument has a number of gaps. In order to make the argument more sound the author needs to include the important facts and figures about the agency as well as its competitors in the brochure. It is not possible to prove the relative effectiveness of the agency by providing erroneous data about single accomplishment.
"Our service, which includes both designing and placing advertisement, is by far the most effective in the industry. For instance, we recently designed and placed a series of advertisements for an apparel company using a professional golfer as a spokesperson. Before the series of ads, a survey showed that only 8% of people who described themselves as non-golf fans had heard of the apparel company. After the series of ads, despite the golfer making national headlines by becoming the youngest golfer ever to win a major professional tournament, over 80% of people from a second survey had heard of the apparel company."
The promotional brochure of an advertising agency states that the agency is most effective in the Industry. To argument substantiates this with the example of the recent advertisement campaign managed by the agency. The agency used a professional golfer as a spokesperson for the advertisement , and the agency undertook the surveys before beginning and after the end of the campaign to evaluate the effectiveness of the campaign. Although the argument tries to prove that the agency is most effective in the industry, I find the argument very much weak. I have illustrated the gaps in the argument in the paragraphs below.
The biggest flaw in the argument is that it does not use same yardstick to measure the effectiveness of the argument. Before beginning of the campaign the agency used the population of non-golf fans to evaluate the brand awareness. However after the series of ads, the agency used the whole population to evaluate the brand awareness. It could have been the case that the brand might have already been very much popular among golf fans. In such scenario, it is not possible to evaluate the effectiveness of campaign as we do not the proportion of the golf fans in total population of survey.
The argument states that the advertisement agency is most effective in the Industry. However it uses only the example of past performance of the agency to substantiate the claim. In order to prove that the agency is most effective, the company needs to present the data related to other firms as well. The argument does not make any such efforts. The agency needs to present the data about all the important parameters of all the competitors to prove that it is most effective advertising firm.
Moreover the argument uses only one example of the past performance of the company to prove its most effective status in the Industry. The performance of the agency over a period is essential to decide about the overall the performance of the agency.
Thus argument has a number of gaps. In order to make the argument more sound the author needs to include the important facts and figures about the agency as well as its competitors in the brochure. It is not possible to prove the relative effectiveness of the agency by providing erroneous data about single accomplishment.
