In their advertising, businesses nowadays usually emphasize that their products are new in some way. Why is this? Do you think it is a positive or negative development?
There has been a colossal upsurge in prodigies discussing the topic of the level of exaggeration in the advertisements which are published in media. Although it is the marketing strategy of the business, I believe that this trend can bring many drawbacks to the users. In this essay, I will cite appropriate reasons that lead to this issue and support my opinion.
First and foremost, blowing up the product's features can support the business to attract more customers in order to create growth in sales. It is evident that the clients are easily impressed by the introduction of advertisements and this activity can make people curious about the quality of the item. Secondly, the company may improve its image in the public eyes and boost its reputation thanks to the advertisements. Some companies release hilarious advertisements to the public in order to change the customer's viewpoint about these organizations. For instance, Dien May Xanh, a Vietnamese company related to technological equipment, published ridiculous advertisements which attract more new potential clients and widespread fame. Thanks to this creativity, this company can observe the rocket in its sales and reach the unexpected target.
Considering the effect of this phenomenon, I contend that it tends to be in a negative direction. To be clear, exaggerating the ingredients of a product can make people misunderstand this function. Most business companies emphasize their product in a positive way which put people at risk of forgetting the potential danger related to the products. Moreover, there is a range of warnings in newspapers about the adverse influence of this trend. The lies from these advertisements originate from the business's lucrative maneuver and sometimes cause harm to the users' health. To cite an example, a lot of advertisements in terms of cosmetics, and functional food,...overstated their features without mentioning the side effects of the products. This trend makes some people who are allergic to these ingredients face far-reaching consequences even death. However, in certain circumstances, these tactics are conducive because they can grasp more customers to experience the business's products and increase the company's profit.
In conclusion, there is a wide range of incentives that force organizations overstate this product's function. In spite of the benefits of this trend, I personally contend that the demerits stemming from this exaggeration are outweigh the merits.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 506, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'customers'' or 'customer's'?
Suggestion: customers'; customer's
...ts to the public in order to change the customers viewpoint about these organizations. Fo...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 246, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a positive way" with adverb for "positive"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...iness companies emphasize their product in a positive way which put people at risk of forgetting ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 560, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'users'' or 'user's'?
Suggestion: users'; user's
...aneuver and sometimes cause harm to the users health. To cite an example, a lot of ad...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 660, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , .
... terms of cosmetics, and functional food,...overstated their features without ment...
^^
Line 4, column 225, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'outweighed'.
Suggestion: outweighed
...its stemming from this exaggeration are outweigh the merits.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, for instance, in conclusion, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 24.0651302605 154% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 58.0 41.998997996 138% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2102.0 1615.20841683 130% => OK
No of words: 385.0 315.596192385 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45974025974 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4296068528 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20512955374 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524675324675 0.561755894193 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 660.6 506.74238477 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.16095454 49.4020404114 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 110.631578947 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2631578947 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.89473684211 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.214155439493 0.244688304435 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0622419557968 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0437347800418 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119196574641 0.151304729494 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0518439669063 0.056905535591 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 78.4519038076 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.