请Romanus作文修改

梦幻空花！UID：2634290

TPO 8 题目： television advertising directly toward young children(aged two to five) should not be allowed.

In general, more and more people deem that advertisements on TV have exaggerated the features of their products and, even worse, they encourage people buy products they do not really need. Obviously, we want to protect the young children from the harm of these advertisements. However, this does not mean that television advertising directly toward young children should be forbidden. There are other civil way.



Advertisements, aimed at motivating people to buy the products, have a bad impression among masses. After all, people always find that the advertisements have exaggerated the functions of its products and made them too impetuous to buy unnecessary products. And, they worry about that the advertise on TV would instill an incorrect value of purchasing in the young children who cannot judge by their own. For example, an advertise shows that its candy is tasty and popular among young children. This may make the youngs feel that they need to buy and eat the candy, which is not healthy for children at that age. Nevertheless, even in this situation, nobody has the right to forbid the television advertising. Because the social system protect both the right of young children and the right of advertise-man.



Aside from its problems discussed above, however, the advertise serves to inform us the new service and high-tech products related to young children. For instance, TV advertising introduces young children the "point-to-read machine", which help them learn to read. It is tempting to think that all the advertises would only introduce the young children products as good as the "point-to-read machine". Yet this might be far too idealist. In other words, if we forbid the television advertising toward children, we would lost the chance to know the instruments and services providing for the new generation.



To sum up, because of the needs of young children and their parents, I believe the potential benefits of the television advertising would outweigh the risks. If we take proper precautions, such as imposing strict television advertising standards, especially for those young children, the whole society stands to benefit.

mpromanusUID：2565872

In general, more and more people deem that advertisements on TV have exaggerated the features of their products and, even worse, they encourage people to buy products they do not really need. Obviously, we want to protect the young children from the harm of these advertisements. However, this does not mean that television advertising directly toward young children should be forbidden. There are other civil ways (What kind of 'way' is a 'civil' way? 'Civil' can mean either 'related to matters of the citizens or the state' or 'civilized, polite', and it's not clear which one you're trying to express. I have a feeling that you might haved wanted to mean 'civilized' rather than 'civil'.).

Advertisements, aimed at motivating people to buy the products (If you mean that all adversements are aimed at motivating people to buy products, it's definitely not true. By definition, an advertisement is simply a public notice that calls for attention. You can even see this meaning in the Chinese version 广告/广而告之. With regard to this definition, a lot of ads are in fact meant to promote public awareness on safety, charity, social values, etc. I believe you have seen a lot of ads that promote voluntary blood donation in China. Do those motivate people to buy products?), have a bad impression among masses. After all, people always find that the advertisements have exaggerated the functions of its products and made them (What? Or Who?) too impetuous to buy unnecessary products. And, they worry about that the advertisements on TV would instill an incorrect value of purchasing? in the young children who cannot judge by their own. For example, an advertisement shows that its a candy is tasty and popular among young children (You need to be aware that the product does NOT belong to the advertisement. The advertisement works for the product, i.e. an advertisement FOR a brand of candy.). This may make the youngs feel that they need to buy and eat the candy, which is not healthy for children at that age. Nevertheless, even in this situation, nobody has the right to forbid the television advertising. Because the social system? protects both the right of young children and the right of advertise-man? (When we talk about 'rights', it's 'legal rights', i.e. rights are defined and enforced and protected by the legal system. If you are talking about the 'social' aspect, then you should be talking about 'standards', not 'rights'. Plus, since you admit that these ads are not good for children, then shouldn't the public's interest of protecting the children be above whatever 'rights' you're talking about? I can argue that since you said children cannot judge by their own, they are not fully functional legal persons, therefore their parents or guadians have the right and must be taken to act on behalf of them. But if the ads are directly broadcasted to the children without the guardians' consent, the broadcast is in fact violating these children's rights of being protected by their guadians and being clearly informed about these ads, therefore such broadcasts should be banned. Think about it.).

Aside from its problems discussed above, however, the advertisement serves to inform us about the new services and high-tech products related to young children. For instance, TV advertising introduces young children the "point-to-read machine", which help them learn to read. It is tempting to think that all the advertisements would only introduce the young children products as good as the "point-to-read machine". Yet this might be far too idealistic. In other words, if we forbid the television advertising toward children, we would lose the chance to know the instruments and services provided for the new generation. (Ahh..that flaw again. If you think such ads are informational, then are the children themselves getting this information and making decisions, or are the parents and guardians getting the information and determining that it's good for the children instead? In other words, who are 'WE' in this paragraph? Remember that we are talking about just advertisements. We are talking about advertisements that are directed towards children aged 2-5. Who are watching such advertisements, and who are you intending to talk about? Think about it.)

To sum up, because of the needs of young children and their parents (There, exactly what I was talking about. Were you talking about 'their parents' in the essay?), I believe the potential benefits of the television advertising would outweigh the risks. If we take proper precautions, such as imposing strict television advertising standards, especially for those young children, the whole society stands to benefit.

总结：

advertise是动词，advertisement才是名词 - 题目里出现过的词请尽量不要搞错。。

你的语言很不错，但在逻辑方面有一个主要的问题，就是你干脆没搞明白你这篇文章在讨论或者应该讨论的主体是哪一群人 - 是小孩子自己还是父母级别的人物。这造成你的论述非常混乱，直到总结段你才有点发现哦这里好像说的还有父母。。而且还有一个问题就是你的开头段的最后一句话是There are other ... ways. 如果你这样结束开始段，你给读者的讯号是这篇文章接下来是讲other ... ways的，但是你要一直到了结束段才提了一句这个。开始和结束的两段是一篇文章的标杆，是最不能马虎的部分，所以必须清楚说明你到底要写什么，要写谁，然后中段的内容要与之配合。