The influence of adds on children
Over the last decades, we have been bombarded by adds directed at our children under the age of 12. Without doubt, it is the most discussing theme among people of all countries. Bans on advertising aimed at young children are already working in such places as Sweden and Greece. Is it high time our government did the same?
Some people urge to see immediate end to the advertising aimed at children since they are absolutely convinced that when children learn the cost of material things and how to manage small quantities of money they should be free to do so without pressure put on them by advertising. They suggest that as things stand, we all are in danger of turning out young consumers rather young citizens – people who define themselves more by what they can buy than what they can contribute to society. Children should be free to channel their energies into forming friendship, unleashing their imaginations, developing talents – things that cost little but have more significant value.
Secondly, the children’s mindы are not able to process the imageries in adds. They are incredibly vulnerable to suggestive and powerful advertisement on TV. These advertisements take advantage of kids and get them «hooked» on food and habits that are destructive to their health going into adulthood. For instant, these advertisements rarely show harmful effect of fat, cholesterol and diabetes from eating this junk food.
In contrast, opponents of banning of such commercial advertisements on TV point out that what is needed is media literacy education. Children should be aware of being bombarded by different kind of messages, good and bad, every day. Parents are in charge of teaching their children to discern these messages from a very early age and to react correctly.
Furthermore, this group of people suggest that commercial advertising might be a perfect place for launching and developing career in show business proving it with great many examples of real stories. In addition, taking into consideration the evolving path of our society, it is essential to figure out what new has appeared on the market.
In balance, frankly speaking, children under the age of 12 are nor mature enough to understand the different between wrong and right things. Although, do teenagers distinguish the right and wrong? Can you claim that the adults always can make the right decision? So the ultimate choice to buy or not is parent’s responsible and banning of commercial advertisements on TV is not solution.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-10 | KarinaShine | 73 | view |
| 2019-09-10 | KarinaShine | 73 | view |
- Some people argue that successful leaders in government industry or other fields must be highly competitive Other people claim that in order to be successful a leader must be willing and able to cooperate with others 60
- Love and Money 67
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 60
- Dating 87
- Public persons in Media 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 18, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'seeing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'urge' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: seeing
...rnment did the same? Some people urge to see immediate end to the advertising aimed ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, frankly, furthermore, if, second, secondly, so, in addition, in contrast, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 7.48453608247 281% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 4.92783505155 162% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 5.05154639175 297% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 9.0 3.03092783505 297% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 35.0 32.9175257732 106% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 26.3917525773 265% => Less preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 7.0 3.85567010309 182% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2126.0 937.175257732 227% => Less number of characters wanted.
No of words: 413.0 206.0 200% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14769975787 4.54256449028 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 3.78020617076 119% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89548492237 2.54303337028 114% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 127.690721649 186% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.573849878935 0.622605031667 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 638.1 290.88556701 219% => syllable counts are too long.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.41237113402 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.13402061856 99% => OK
Article: 1.0 0.824742268041 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.83505154639 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.463917525773 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 1.44329896907 346% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 12.6804123711 158% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 16.3608247423 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 56.9468831456 44.8134815571 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.3 76.5299724578 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.65 16.8248392259 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.3 4.34317383033 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.29896907216 140% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 2.54639175258 39% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 7.41237113402 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.49484536082 468% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 3.94845360825 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.142570122008 0.216113520407 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0411751609536 0.0766984524023 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.055351914743 0.0603063233224 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0709222716836 0.12726935374 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0501597608495 0.0580467560999 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 8.37731958763 158% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 70.7449484536 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 3.82989690722 230% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 7.45979381443 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 8.71597938144 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 7.59969072165 112% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 41.2886597938 245% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 8.62886597938 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 8.54432989691 117% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 8.15463917526 123% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.