The lecture and reading passage hold different positions respectively, on the issue of buzzers. The lecture's argument is formed around many points that are in direct contrast to the materials in the reading passage.
First off, the reading passage suggests that customers tend to accept the opinion from the buzzer without suspicion. However, the lecture rebuts this point by claiming that people do not easily believe the information provided by buzzers. The reason is that after gaining information from buzzers, people usually reviewed the information through the internet. For example, they are able to utilize other consumers' reviews.
Also, the reading passage claims that these paid advertisers frequently magnify the benefits of a product or brand because they are hired to promote positive characteristics and often have no practical experience with the product. On the other hand, the lecture refutes this point by claiming that buzzers are well aware of the features of products. This is attributed to the reason companies hire customers who are originally loyal to their brands as buzzers. Therefore, buzzers are already well-informative about the benefits and drawbacks of products.
Lastly, the reading passage argues that buzz-building cultivates the trend of mistrust and deception among people. In contrast, the lecture counters this point by claiming that buzzlers do not destory trust. This is because if products are bad, it is hard to recruit buzzlers. As a result, a majority of people is likely going to be satisfied with products recommended by buzzlers. In addition, they will have a favorable view of taking information from others.
In conclusion, althouth the reading passage presents three aspects with regard to the issue of buzzers, the lecture's argument makes it clear that none of these points justifies the reading passage's suggestion.