The passage and the lecture are both about buzzing, which is an innovative method of advertisement. The writer believes that this can be a deceiving way to promote a product. However, the speaker, who is a buzzer himself, says the passage does not accurately present how buzzing works.
First, buzzers are actually owners of the product they promote. The writer states that the consumers should be aware when a product is advertised in order to avoid to be mislead. Anyway, the speaker contradicts this by underlying that companies hire individuals who have previously purchased the item, who is happy with it from all the points of view, and thus his statements are not misguiding. This is a strong counter-point to the author's point of view.
Second, most of people are not taking for granted all the information transmitted by buzzers. Furthermore, they are questioning the product's quality by asking plenty of questions about its services, price and so forth. Therefore, if the buzzer has no plausible answer to all questions, the probability for other people to buy the product is quite law. Thus, this contradicts the author's point of view who considers that clients would be less critically if they do not know when a person makes hidden advertisement.
Third, people will gain more trust and openness towards others. The writer believes that people will lose confidence in others, because of the spread of unrealistic information. On the other hand, the speaker proves the contrary, because buzzers produce positive experiences, provide real knowledge about the product, and in the end the customer will be happy with the choice he made. In conclusion, the writer and the lecturer seem to be in totally disagreement regarding this topic.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 159, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'avoid being'.
Suggestion: avoid being
...hen a product is advertised in order to avoid to be mislead. Anyway, the speaker contradict...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 458, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ter-point to the authors point of view. Second, most of people are not taking fo...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 9, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
...the authors point of view. Second, most of people are not taking for granted all the info...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, anyway, first, furthermore, however, if, regarding, second, so, therefore, third, thus, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1471.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14335664336 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8249952342 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587412587413 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 443.7 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.3324220534 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0666666667 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0666666667 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06452816374 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.341618635807 0.272083759551 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10243032152 0.0996497079465 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0642920199713 0.0662205650399 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189974849455 0.162205337803 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0669695142887 0.0443174109184 151% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.