Advertising encourages customers to buy in quantity not in quality. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The rise of technology and information tracking in recent decades has made advertisements become ubiquitous in human’s daily life, which encourages companies and individuals to use advertisements as a profitable tool. There is a notion that getting consumers to buy in quantity is what advertisements today mainly focus on. In my opinion, I partly agree with this statement as although advertisements indeed often secretly trick customers into making unnecessary purchases, they sometimes offer quality products information to users as well/in some cases.
On the one hand, some people hold the notion that advertisements motivate consumers to focus on quantity rather than quality because of some reasons. Granted, many companies’ selling strategies share a noticeably common plan, which is to provide customers with special deals by purchasing more products. For example, McDonald’s offers special coupons when buying two or more of the same meal, Uniqlo offers a pack of three masks when a deal exceeds the limit of 2 million Vnd. Hence, this advertisement strategy encourages customers to spend more than necessary. As a result of these marketing strategies, many typical propositions create a tendency of buying in a large number as well as efficiently make profit for companies.
On the other hand, as believed by many people, myself included, any advertisement promotes the value of products. As claimed, a large number of notions are usually about how valuable a product is instead of how many of it can be purchased for a set number of prices. Hence, this leads to a completely different marketing strategy compared to the marketing strategy of Mc Donald, KFC, Jollibee as well as other lowkey companies, whose advertisements mainly focus on quantity. For instance, mobile phone advertisements of some tech giants such as Apple, Samsung, Huawei tend to show off features and qualities before announcing the prices. This advertisement trend creates a considerable surge in phone’s revenue.
In conclusion, some advertisements promote consumers to buy a great deal of products in order to receive extra deals or discounts. However, as believed by many people as well as me, advertisements of many companies strongly promote products’ quality and at the same making an act of purchasing redundant products seems reasonable.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-11-21 | Trần Ánh Vy | 73 | view |
| 2024-11-20 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-20 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-20 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-11-18 | Thai Tran | 84 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 504, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'products'' or 'product's'?
Suggestion: products'; product's
...purchases, they sometimes offer quality products information to users as well/in some ca...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 126, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...otes the value of products. As claimed, a large number of notions are usually about how valuable ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 332, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ng redundant products seems reasonable.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, however, if, so, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, in my opinion, in some cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 7.85571142285 13% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1981.0 1615.20841683 123% => OK
No of words: 364.0 315.596192385 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44230769231 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36792674256 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15562012176 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.574175824176 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 628.2 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.7649064969 49.4020404114 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.066666667 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2666666667 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.2 7.06120827912 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216217562633 0.244688304435 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0765267765446 0.084324248473 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0550495595257 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139431482432 0.151304729494 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0680187144604 0.056905535591 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.03 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.78957915832 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.