The lecture and the reading material debate over buzzers. The reading passage lists a few harmful aspects of buzzing.However, the lecturer totally refutes the reading material.
Firstly, contrary to the claim in the passage that buzzers are not telling the truth since they're paid, the lectuerer points out that the buzzers are actually users of the company's product who think the product's good. Therefore, customers get the truth from the buzzers. The lectuerer himself is a buzzer for a phone service. He buzzes because he thinks the product's good.
secondly, unlike the critics' prediction that customers are less guarded when listening to buzzers, the lectuerer claims that the case is just the opposite: customers usually ask a lot of questions, such as price, service, etc. Which means that if the buzzer fails to answer the question correctly the customer would get more suspicious and quit consuming.
Finally, the reading asserts that buzzing may harm social relationships due to the dishonesty displayed by the buzzer. This, to the lectuerer, is quite stupid. Again the fact just tells a different story: if the company is selling a bad product there'd be no buzzer. So people try buzzing are providing sincere informations and ,since there product is good, will have a good experience and end up being more trustful and open top people.