The author describes that nowadays buzzing is the bone of the contentions, and many critics would like to see it banned and brings up three reasons to support this claim. On the other hand, the professor explains that the article about buzzers is misleading and cause the wrong impression and refutes each of the author's points on rational grounds.
First of all, the writer states that the critics complain that consumers should know whether a person praising a product is being paid to praise the product, since they may give a person incorrect information about the buzzed product. Nevertheless, the professor posits that it is a wrong statement that buzzers do not tell the truth. In fact, the company finds people who use the products and have a positive attitude towards them. He adds that buzzers get paid in exchange for buzzing, but they tell the truths. They really think that the products work well.
Second, according to the reading, as buzzers pretend they are just private individuals, consumers listen to their endorsements less critically than they should. Conversely, the professor brings up the idea that it is a wrong assertion that people believe everything buzzers said, actually the opposite is true. As a matter of fact, consumers ask lots of questions about the products, prizes, how long buzzers use them and the products' services. If the buzzers cannot answer their questions, people won't buy the products.
Third, the writer expresses that buzzing cause harmful effect on the social relationship. However, the professor points out that the idea that buzzing adversely affect and destroy the civilization is a stupid viewpoint. To be more specific, if the products are bad and have low quality, the company can't recruit the buzzers. Actually, buzzers praise the good products such as phone services and buzzers have good experiences, which causes end up being more trustful and open to people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 299, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...e bad and have low quality, the company cant recruit the buzzers. Actually, buzzers ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, conversely, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, really, second, so, third, well, in fact, such as, as a matter of fact, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1608.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10476190476 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57132274915 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565079365079 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3500439986 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.2 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.2666666667 7.06452816374 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.458016835047 0.272083759551 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135424884683 0.0996497079465 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.108344278596 0.0662205650399 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.246814925403 0.162205337803 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.127420755789 0.0443174109184 288% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 10.7273730684 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.