Summarize the points made in the lecture.being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.
Reading：
Many consumers ignore commercial advertisements. In response, advertising companies have started using a new tactic, called “buzzing." The advertisers hire people,buzzers,who personally promote (buzz) products to people they know or meet. The key part is that the buzzers do not reveal that they are being paid to promote anything. They behave as though they were just spontaneously praising a product during normal conversation. Buzzing has generated a lot of controversy, and many critics would like to see it banned.
First, the critics complain that consumers should know whether a person praising a product is being paid to praise the product. Knowing this makes a big difference: we expect the truth from people who we believe do not have any motive for misleading us. But with buzzing what you hear is just paid advertising, which may well give a person incorrect information about the buzzed product.
Second, since buzzers pretend they are just private individuals, consumers listen to their endorsements less critically than they should. With advertisements in print or on TV, the consumer is on guard for questionable claims or empty descriptions such as "new and improved." But when consumers do not know they are being lobbied, they may accept claims they would otherwise be suspicious of. This may suit the manufacturers, but it could really harm consumers.
And worst of all is the harmful effect that buzzing is likely to have on social relationships. Once we become aware that people we meet socially may be buzzers with a hidden agenda, we will become less trustful of people in general. So buzzing will result in the spread of mistrust and the expectation of dishonesty.
The reading and the lecture are both about buzzing. The author of the reading believes that buzzing makes plenty of controversial situations. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that buzzing is totally good behavior.
First of all, the reading passage claims that buzzers just pretend to praise product so that misleading consumers to buy their products. However, Bill, the speaker rebuts the statement with the idea that buzzers are not paid to give some incorrect information to consumers. He also points out companies will hire people who have used their products so that they are willing to share their real thoughts with consumers.
Second, the passage asserts that buzzers pretend they are individuals. And buzzers say something which makes consumers feel really suspicious. Nevertheless, the speaker argues that the statement in the reading passage is totally wrong. He suggests that buzzers should know details about the product such as price, service. According to these responses, consumers will make their final decision.
Finally, the reading passage states that buzzing would like to harm buzzer’s social relationships. Nonetheless, the speaker questions this view. He illustrates that buzzers promote worthy products which can make consumers have a good experience. As a result, these behaviors will benefit buzzer’s social relationships.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 143, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...kes plenty of controversial situations. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, nevertheless, nonetheless, really, second, so, such as, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 19.0 30.3222958057 63% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1193.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 213.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.60093896714 5.08290768461 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82027741392 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76703116362 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.577464788732 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 343.8 419.366225166 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.3724278746 49.2860985944 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 74.5625 110.228320801 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.3125 21.698381199 61% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3125 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.140856780741 0.272083759551 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0472450188907 0.0996497079465 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0455627578914 0.0662205650399 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0893657324344 0.162205337803 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0358254948361 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.28 53.8541721854 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.31 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.