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 lecturer and the reading are both about the necessity of banning buzzing due to harmful effect on the consumer. whereas the reading claims that the buzzing is controversial and affect detrimentally society, the lecturer states that the buzzing have not those negative facets as shown in the passage. The speaker casts doubt on the main points made in the passage by providing very logical and compelling reaosns cogently.
First of all. according to the reading, the consumer need to know whether the buzzer is being paid or not for raising the buzz product so that can know about the motives of the person to whom they trust. However, the lecturer says that the claim mention in the passage is rediculous as they always posits thruth while they are telling about the product. Furthermore, he mentions that people who do buzzing praise the good product what they ecperience well enough.
Secondly, the reading claims that people, who pretend to be private, get trusted by the consumer without the critical evaluation. Nevertheless, the lecturer refutes the claim. he points out that people ask a myriad of the question regarding the product; they ask about the question about the products' price, service and buzzers opinion about how long it will last. In addition, people will get information all about the product even they sought ot believe the person before its purchase.
Lastly, the reading posits that the disingenuous nature of buzzer may ruin the relationship with their relative. On the other hands, the lecturer dismisses the blame by saying that buzzers only sell the product which is good in quality otherwise the company may unable to pay for the buzzer. Moreover, the lecture feels that the quality of the product is very good enough to advertise b y the person and what they say is always truth about the product by their own experience.
- In 1995 a microscopic fungus called phytophthora ramorum, or P. ramorum, was first detected in the forests of the western United States. P. ramorum infects trees and causes particularly serious damage in oak trees: in many infected oaks, leaves wither rap 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
- One can learn a lot about a person from the type of friends that the person has. 70
- TPO 16 Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The best way to travel is in a group led by a tour guide 70
- Ethanol fuel, made from plants such as corn and sugar cane, has been advocated by some people as an alternative to gasoline in the United States. However, many critics argue that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline for several reasons.First, th 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 117, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Whereas
... due to harmful effect on the consumer. whereas the reading claims that the buzzing is ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 15, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: According
...reaosns cogently. First of all. according to the reading, the consumer need to kn...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 299, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'posit'
Suggestion: posit
...he passage is rediculous as they always posits thruth while they are telling about the...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 177, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: He
...heless, the lecturer refutes the claim. he points out that people ask a myriad of ...
^^
Line 13, column 449, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (ot) must be used with a third-person verb: 'believes'.
Suggestion: believes
...l about the product even they sought ot believe the person before its purchase. ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, lastly, may, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, well, whereas, while, in addition, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1570.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03205128205 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46778845633 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.541666666667 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 461.7 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.8882728287 49.2860985944 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.142857143 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2857142857 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.7857142857 7.06452816374 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.179718740241 0.272083759551 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.059925302689 0.0996497079465 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496723700097 0.0662205650399 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108698447891 0.162205337803 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0455370359414 0.0443174109184 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.