The following editorial appeared in the Lamont Times newspaper."During last year’s election, only 35 percent of people living in Lamont voted, whereas inthe nearby affluent town of Chiswick, that number was 75 percent. In a recent survey ofyoung ad

Essay topics:

The following editorial appeared in the Lamont Times newspaper.

"During last year’s election, only 35 percent of people living in Lamont voted, whereas in

the nearby affluent town of Chiswick, that number was 75 percent. In a recent survey of

young adults, over 80 percent of respondents in Chiswick reported frequently using their

mobile devices to access social media sites. However, in Lamont, only 60 percent of

young adults who own mobile devices reported accessing their social media accounts on a

regular basis. The survey also revealed that young adults in both towns who use social

media at least once a day are more likely to consider themselves knowledgeable about

current political and social issues, which is considered a key characteristic of those who

vote. Clearly, the number of people who vote in elections is higher in Chiswick than in

Lamont because more of Chiswick’s young adults actively participate in social media."

Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could

rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account

for the facts presented in the argument.

The article states people voted significantly more in affluent town of Chiswick compared to Lamont. The author makes the assumption that the people use social media are very knowledgable about current affairs based on the survey conducted. However the argument is fraught with holes and it may not be correct to assume that social media is the only reason for increased voting percentage in Chiswick.

First, In the survey conducted it has been stated only 80 percent of young respondents in Chiswick reported access to social media sites. There is a possibility that the many of young people would not have responded to the survey. If the population of young people in Chiswick is one million and only 10 percent of them responded to the survey, out of which only 80% are keen in accessing social media sites. which roughly translates to 0.08 million people, whereas in the town of Lamont, with similar young population of 1 million, Even if half a million owns mobile phone, 60% of them responded which roughly translates to 0.3 million. Thus the number of social media users on Lament is significantly higher than Chiswick. If social media is directly influencing more on voting percentage, Then Lament would have had the highest voting percentage than the Chiswick. But that is not the case.

Furthermore, the article doesnt talk about the adult population in both the cities and what proportion of people are young in both towns. If adult population is significantly higher compared to young in Chiswick, and all of them have voted, which would have boosted voting percentage in the town of chiswick. Going with similar assumption of more adult population in Lament and majority of them have not voted, then voting contribution has come only from youngsters in Lament, which severely undermines the author's argument.

Finally, it is not clear in the article about the ways of how they conducted the survey, if it has been conducted only on college students or young officer goers. Because office goers are typically busy with their work and dont get enough time to respond well to survey. So all these factors are likely to introduce significant bias into the author's main point.

To Conclude, though social media is good at conveying political and social issues faster than other forms of media and likely to improve voting percentage to pick their leaders, there are lot of factors which needs has to be thought through before arriving at any conclusion. As described, there are lot of possiblities which needs to be analysed well before concluding social media and youngsters are major factors for the difference in voting percentage between two towns.

Votes
Average: 5.5 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
This essay topic by users:
Post date Users Rates Content
2020-01-17 ramji90 55 Read full essay
2020-01-16 Hawwina 16 Read full essay
2020-01-16 ramji90 59 Read full essay
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 241, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... affairs based on the survey conducted. However the argument is fraught with holes and ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 410, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Which
...e keen in accessing social media sites. which roughly translates to 0.08 million peop...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 639, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...hich roughly translates to 0.3 million. Thus the number of social media users on Lam...
^^^^
Line 9, column 26, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...the case. Furthermore, the article doesnt talk about the adult population in both...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 508, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...n Lament, which severely undermines the authors argument. Finally, it is not clear...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 224, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... are typically busy with their work and dont get enough time to respond well to surv...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, then, thus, well, whereas, as to

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2238.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 443.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05191873589 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59666296645 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455981941309 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 684.0 705.55239521 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.2438732008 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.333333333 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6111111111 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.88888888889 5.70786347227 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.133142890685 0.218282227539 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0517354475433 0.0743258471296 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0489171634977 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0761321690637 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0514054399672 0.0628817314937 82% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4 Out of 6
---------------------
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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 443 350
No. of Characters: 2179 1500
No. of Different Words: 194 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.588 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.919 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.536 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 70 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.059 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.326 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.765 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.345 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.576 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.147 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5