TPO 19
The focus of the reading and lecture are on buzzing, which is a tactic for advertising a product to the people they meet and praising it as someone who just appreciates a product and not being paid by a company. Despite the author's statement that the buzzing has caused many problems, the lecturer holds an opposing view. He is of the opinion that critics are misleading and they give the wrong impression. He brings up a number of contradictory points in its rejection.
First of all, the author holds the idea that the consumers should know that the person who is advertising the product is getting paid. It is mentioned that people expect truth from individuals and the may get the wrong information. The lecturer denies this notion and states that it is not true that the consumers may get incorrect information regarding the product. Furthermore, he argues that buzzers advertise a product that is certain about its great characteristic, so people will not get the wrong information.
Secondly, the writer contends that people listen to the buzzers less critically. The article notes that this matter may hurt the consumers since they will be less suspicious about the advertisement they hear. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by asserting that this idea is not true because people ask a lot of questions when a product is being introduced to them. He elaborates on this by explaining that since the buzzer is using the specific product he/she can answer the questions about the price and services of the product. In this regard, the consumers will have whole information and will not mislead.
Finally, it is claimed in the article that buzzing can hurt the social life of the people. The author establishes that when people know about the real purpose of the buzzer and the fact that he/she is being paid to advertise the product, they will become less trustful of people. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that it is not true that buzzing destroys civilization. He puts forth the notion that when people have good experience in the product that was introduced to them by an individual, they become more trustful.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 225, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ot being paid by a company. Despite the authors statement that the buzzing has caused m...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 10.4613686534 191% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 26.0 12.0772626932 215% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 50.0 22.412803532 223% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1772.0 1373.03311258 129% => OK
No of words: 362.0 270.72406181 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89502762431 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66766741496 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453038674033 0.540411800872 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 530.1 419.366225166 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.6469311312 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.235294118 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2941176471 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.82352941176 7.06452816374 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.458528267322 0.272083759551 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.144033796531 0.0996497079465 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0906289991617 0.0662205650399 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.282352469973 0.162205337803 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0313139769272 0.0443174109184 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.