TPO 19

In set of the materials, the writer strongly postualtes that buzzing, which is a person to person advertizing technique, should be delegalized. He provides three reasons to endorse this suggestion. On the other hand, the lecturer states that this is really misleading, illogical and gives a wrong impression abou such an advertisemnt method, and gainsays each of the argument mentioned in the writing.

First and foremost, the passage begins by asserting that the consumers are harmed as a result of ill-informed about the product by such paid agents who have an ulterior motive of selling out their product through out overrrating it. Nonetheless the professor maintains that, these promoters, inspite of getting paid, they beilieve in what they promote in light of having been happily long experienced with it, which in and of its self, was the only cause they were hired in the first place. He exemplifies on this by his own good phone service that he really reckons as great therefore the company recruited him.

Next, the man further points on that usually people bombard the seller with tons of questions about almost every aspect such as the price, seervice and how long the buzzer has used the product. If there was not an approriate answer, they would not purchase it. This refutes the writer's implications that buyers gullibly accept the buzzed good depending on just knowing the seller, without investigating it.

ultimately, the passage wraps up by declaring that such a kind of promotion is devastating on the fabric of society. This is courtesy of the people having become suspicious about their fellow community members who may be selling agents with a hidden agenda. The speaker in the audio rebuts this by insisting that the opposite is true. This is courtesy of, not just are the buzzers sincere, but also they give the buyers good experience, therefor the trust is boosted among society members and evenyually the social bondage is reinforced.