Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Television advertising directed towards young children aged two to five should not be allowed Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer

Essay topics:

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Television advertising directed towards young children (aged two to five) should not be allowed.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

Despite television advertising directed towards young children may not be able to create much effect and could bring negative effects to young children, there are still some benefits that young children can gain from watching television advertising. Hence, I do not agree that television advertising towards young children should not be allowed, for the following reasons.

It is understandable that some people may concern that advertising directed towards young children could bring children several negative effects, such as letting children form wrong beliefs, losing attention on reading books, and so on. Since young children aged two to five are still in the stage of forming the concept of the world, and watching television too early may influence their growing process. For example, if a kid starts watching television when she or he is younger than five, she or he may get used to putting their attention on moving objects rather than on motionless books, which makes them harder to learn knowledge from books.

However, television advertising directed towards young children can be an effective mean for them to learn new knowledge. Along with the development of technologies, more and more educators start employing digital devices as tools for student to learn new knowledge. Because moving objects are easier to catch their attention. Take an advertisement that I saw for example. The advertisement was about English learning videos, which mainly target for young children, so the style of the advertisement was like a cartoon. In my opinion, it is a good way for them to learn new knowledge, even though it is not a lot. Thus, banning television advertising for young children may reduce the diversity of sources for them to learn new stuff.

Instead of banning advertisements directly toward young children, there are many other ways for adults to prevent negative effects brought to young children. We can restrict the time that children spent on watching television to avoid them being addictive to watching television. And the minister of media can review the content of advertisement to prevent children from watching inappropriate advertisement. For example, in Taiwan, there are more and more internet or channel service provider that developed usage restriction service for parents. In that way parents do not need to worry about their children spending too much time on watching television, and young children do not lose an interesting way to learn new knowledge.

In conclusion, compare with not allowing television advertisement to young children, there are many alternative solutions for parents to prevent the negative effects that television brings to children. And children can enjoy the convenience that technologies bring us as well.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 268, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ols for student to learn new knowledge. Because moving objects are easier to catch thei...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 486, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'providers'?
Suggestion: providers
...re and more internet or channel service provider that developed usage restriction servic...
^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, however, if, may, so, still, thus, well, as to, for example, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 43.0788530466 72% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2346.0 1977.66487455 119% => OK
No of words: 436.0 407.700716846 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38073394495 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56953094068 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87018902132 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 212.727598566 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47247706422 0.524837075471 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 699.3 618.680645161 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.86738351254 268% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.7880347118 48.9658058833 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.473684211 100.406767564 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9473684211 20.6045352989 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52631578947 5.45110844103 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.284139512768 0.236089414692 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108307014611 0.076458572812 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0930572315402 0.0737576698707 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.194638409691 0.150856017488 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0724255279613 0.0645574589148 112% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 11.7677419355 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 10.9000537634 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.01818996416 100% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 86.8835125448 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

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.