Do you agree or dis agree with the following statement?
Television advertising directed toward young children (aged two to five)
should not be allowed.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
In this economy-centered world,
advertisements are a widely used method to boost the selling of products.
Recently, a debate concerning whether television advertising directed towards
young kids should be allowed has caused grave concerns.
Many people, if not most, harbor the idea that banning advertisements
even if they are directed towards kids is unnecessary,
while I firmly believe that laws should restrict this kind of advertisements.
Among mountains of reasons supporting my point of view,
I would like to list three most significant ones.
To begin with,
advertising which aims at young kids would eventually put a strain
on the financial situation of the families.
Unlike adults, young kids are not equipped with the ability to think reasonably.
Being been captured by the fascinating advertisements introducing clothes or toys,
young children are likely to beg to their parents to own the products.
Parents, who undoubtedly love the kids, always surrender and buy the products.
Eventually, as young children ask for more and more products
that have been brilliantly praised on TV,
the financial situation would get worse.
This point is best illustrated with the example of my cousin, Kevin.
When he was only four, according to his parents,
he asked his parents to buy those overly high-valued toys on
TV every week and during that time, one sixth of the income of the
family was spent on toys. To sum up, banning advertisements directed
at young children is in great need, since they would cast stresses on the families'
financial management.
What is also worth mentioning is that the transmission of those advertisements
makes young kids enchanted with TV, which is detrimental to their growth.
Although for business purposes, kid-aimed advertising
always contain brilliantly embellished
cartoons to catch the attention of curious kids.
Merely watching advertisements, kids are likely to be the victim of television,
which impairs eyesight and distract kids from studying.
This point can be demonstrated by the instance of my sister Jane.
Her mother complains all the time that her daughter's addiction to cartoons started with
TV advertisements. Now 13 years old, my sister is still fascinated with TV programs
and her has put on eyeglasses for over 7 years. This vivid instance tells that banning
advertisements directed towards young kids would be expected by the general public
since they hamper kids' healthy growth by binding them with television.
Last but not least, advertisements used by companies could indirectly harm kids' health.
Utilized by companies that court fortune rather than reputation, advertisements commonly
include fake and extravagant information to persuade consumers.
The problem with toys is extremely serious since it affects our future.
When kids' parents buy toys and other products that are claimed
to be ecological and pollutant-free, they are not aware that actually toys and
other plastic kids' products release harmful gases that has a detrimental effect on the
circulation system of kids, who are vulnerable to these stimulations.
According to the survey done by BBC in 2008, approximately 81 percent
of the toys sold in UK contain more or less toxic chemicals.
The result reveals that laws should be set up to ban those advertisement
that are directed at young kids, since they contain unreliable information
and can do harm to kids.
To put it into a nutshell, although these advertisements may be central to companies,
I still believe in my choice, since those advertisements make families
under financial pressure, induce kids to watch TV more often and even have harmful
impacts on health system of young children.
The article and the lecture hold opposite ideas whether three solutions to prevent birds
from get injured hitting glasses are effective. The article believes that these solutions
are effectual, while the lecture maintains that they are useless.
Firstly, the article mentions that constructors could use on-way glass,
which people inside the room can see out, while birds outside could not see in.
In this way, birds would understand the glass is a solid barrier and not fly through.
However, the lecture reckons that one-way glass is just like a mirror from outside.
However, the birds do not understand the mirror.
Thus, if they see the reflection of clouds and trees,
they would perceive them as real and try to fly through.
Secondly, the article alleges that by putting some colorful designs such as patterns or
stripes on the glass windows, the birds would see them and avoid trying to fly through
the glass. Also, people inside can look out through areas without decorations.
In contrast, the lecture contends that the areas where there is no stripe or pattern may
be perceived as open holes by birds and they would try to fly through them.
To avoid this from happening, the areas without signs should be small enough,
which is not acceptable since the inside would get too dark to work in.
Thirdly, the article argues that the building could use electromagnets to generate
a magnetic field that steer birds in a direction away from the building.
On the other hand, the lecture insists that birds only use magnetic navigation
while taking long journey, such as fly from cold places to warmer areas.
However, when they are doing short trips like flying through a city,
they would use eyes and lights to navigate.
This fact proves that this approach is ineffectual.
The article and the lecture hold opposite ideas concerning whether electronic
medical database has advantages over traditional paper-based record keeping.
The article lists three advantages of electronic record keeping,
while the lecture maintains that these advantages are not that significant.
Firstly, the article claims that electronic records can help reduce costs,
since electronic records take no space and doctors are able to access the information
anywhere and easily duplicate and transfer them.
The traditional records, however, takes much money in copying, faxing and transporting.
The lecture, on the other hand, believes that even for doctors who adopt the
electronic records, they still keep paper records for emergency since paper records
have signatures for legal use. Thus, the costs by paper records are still paid.
Secondly, the article alleges that electronic records are able to reduce the chance
of medical errors, which have serious consequences. The improper organization and
illegible handwriting make errors occur. The electronic records, in contrast,
have standardized forms had legible fonts that minimize errors.
Nonetheless, the lecture reckons that even doctors who use electronic records are
used to using pan and paper while seeing patients, and the electronic records are later
made by stuff members who have to recognize what doctors wrote.
Therefore, the human error cannot be reduced by utilizing electronic records.
Thirdly, the article contends that electronic medical records can aid medical research
by making it possible gain large amounts of information from records.
While paper records makes it impractical to go through large amount of data,
electronic ones are formatted for data collection and could be access by any research
location. However, the lecture argues that people would still have difficulty accessing
the information since the strict privacy law of USA enables patients to block the use of
their medical records. Hence, medical researchers have to follow truly strict and complex
process and get a lot of permissions, including the agreements from patients.
In this way, the significance of electronic records is dampened.
In the reading passage, the author claims that scientists recently found actual tissues
of the animal named T.rex. Nevertheless, from the perspective of the speaker,
identifications made by the reading are absolutely skeptical.
Firstly, the passage points out that there was the presence of soft organic substance
which represents the remains of actual blood vessels inside the channels.
Notwithstanding, the listening part contradicts with the view.
Flexible substance isn’t necessarily the remains of blood vessels at all since
after organisms died, bacteria might colonize hollows and produce something left here.
Therefore, what scientists found might be residue left by bacteria colonies.
Secondly, the author believes that presence of spheres could be remains
of red blood cells and those spheres had dark red centers which correspond to the color
of reddish of iron. Nevertheless, in the speaker’s opinion, fossils include
some primitive animals which did not have any blood cells.
Thus, those spheres might come from different origins such as reddish minerals.
Ultimately, the writer gives evidences of the presence of collagen
which is exactly the material that one would expect to find in association
with bone tissue. However, the lecture points out that collagen are never found
in animal remains that are older one hundred thousand years.
Consequently, the collagen may not come from fossils but from human skins,
which means that collagen may have come from the skin of researchers
who just handled the bone.