TPO 17 independent agree or not? most advertisements make products seem much better than they really are.
Whether manufacturers exaggerate abount their products in their advertisements or not is a convoluted controversy. On the one hand, some people belive that it is actually true inasmuch as the factories have to sell their goods in any possible ways. On the other hand, some individuals think that advertisements are robustly showing the truth about the products because not telling the truth is an insincere action. In my point of view, I am inclined to the former idea in spite of the fact that the latter has more aficionados among people. My answer to this bone of contention is twofold, and in the followimg, the rationale behind it will be elaborated by the most outstanding, solid proofs.
The first and foremost rationalization which is worth mentioning is that producers must attract more customers; therefore, they some how have to sugar coat their products; if they do not, they will lose consumers even though this action is not fair. To put it into a more vivid picture, a cheese cake factory in Norway once announced that their cakes have the lowest calorie in comparison with other brands, but their lie was pretty obvious to nutritionists. Ignoring nutritionists' warnings, people consumed that factory's cakes exessively and put it as a main contributor of their food chain. Consequently, the obesity among Norwegian children increased for 20% between 2010 and 2015, thanks to the misled advertisement of that factory. Fortunately, after this bad experience, their government banned the advertisements aimed to mislead people, especially the children.
The second and equally far-reaching explanation to bear in mind is that in today's competitive market, manufacturers have no other choices instead of showing exaggerated advertisements owing to the fact that they have to compete with others in order to maintain and increase their market share. As an illustration, NOKIA in 2005 introduced a state-of-the-art mobile phone that had a 2 mega pixels camera which was a completely innovative technological device for that era. The managers in their advertisements claimed that this phone is the climax of the mobile indutry and no other companies cannot reach this creation for the next 20 years although in the meanwhile, other anonymous brands like SAMSUNG was selling the same phones. This injusticed advertisements caused a dramatic decrease in other factories' sells and offered a great income for NOKIA. However, after two years, due to their managers' scandals, they annouced their bankrupcy. Afterwards, it was globally accepted that no firms would lie in their advertisements.
In conclusion, taking all the aforementioned identifications into account, I concur with this presumption that manufacturers sugar coat their products in their advertisements. They unfortunately have to attract more consumers and have to survive in their competative industry. Even if their goods are satisfactory, they must not mislead people especially innocent kids.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 129, Rule ID: SOME_HOW[1]
Message: Did you mean 'somehow'?
Suggestion: somehow
...attract more customers; therefore, they some how have to sugar coat their products; if t...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 390, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'pixels'' or 'pixel's'?
Suggestion: pixels'; pixel's
...-the-art mobile phone that had a 2 mega pixels camera which was a completely innovativ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, while, in conclusion, in spite of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 54.0 43.0788530466 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2510.0 1977.66487455 127% => OK
No of words: 465.0 407.700716846 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.39784946237 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18282911927 2.67179642975 119% => OK
Unique words: 259.0 212.727598566 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556989247312 0.524837075471 106% => OK
syllable_count: 778.5 618.680645161 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.2810555879 48.9658058833 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.105263158 100.406767564 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4736842105 20.6045352989 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.52631578947 5.45110844103 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0859528139699 0.236089414692 36% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0309406808373 0.076458572812 40% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0252862799096 0.0737576698707 34% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0606566436461 0.150856017488 40% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0100395940561 0.0645574589148 16% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 11.7677419355 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 58.1214874552 67% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.1575268817 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 10.9000537634 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.45 8.01818996416 118% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 86.8835125448 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.