Claim: It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero.
Reason: The reputation of anyone who is subjected to media scrutiny will eventually be diminished.
Admittedly, the fallacious character of certain editorial policies might confound people, and even biase their judgements towards their leaders' or models' achievements and failures. Some of the contemporary medias' idiosyncrasies are the genesis of a distortion of the information and its sense. Television, which elicits all our senses and is often instrumentalized to choose its own heroic figures, paves the way for tendentious ideas towards the heroes not considered as such by a little elite. Media's scrutiny, as evidenced by tabloids, is the catalyst for people to be boxed into standard definitions social groups, and in some manner, precludes us from regarding living men or women as heroes. The blinkered idea, for instance, that athletes have sumptuous living and are superficial is endorsed by the majority.
The eco chamber fueled by reporters, but which also constitutes the people's demand, has truly been devastating for many artists viewed as heroes. Information's simplification and discontinuity, or the lack of insight and nuance help distill insidious preconceptions, and the judgement would be made even before people take the time to carefully analyze the ins and outs of an issue. Given the complexity of our world, a good reputation is quite hard to maintain. This duality though, since the great majority might be manipulated but is also avid of personal informations or additional analyses, calls into question the unique responsibility of media in this debate, negating the unqualified statement made by the author.
The notion of hero like Homer or Plato in their times, is far outdated. Barring the aforementioned limits of the contemporay society, one should also consider the human mind's tendentious inclination to readily acclaim a politician or a social activist, and to subsequently ,and mistakenly hate this person due to superficial reasons or apocryphal errors. Not only the eco chamber precludes societies to erect a human being as a hero, but both the celerity of our lifestyle and our failure in carving out strong traits of personality or a cogent opinion, are instrumental in the author's claim. Citizens as individuals shouldn't be deprived of their cognitive skills, nor of their capacities to assay the veracity of sayings and images. Indeed, it also lies in their responsibility to counterbalance and not to take all what might be asserted in social networks or television as gospel truth. Passivity and intellectual laziness are contingent upon each person.
On the other hand, the positive impact of media shoudn't be neglected. It is indeed of great importance, for it permits us to be truly informed and unveils the grim facet of many public figures. In this regard, these are instrumental not in diminishing the reputation of public men and women, but merely in throwing the light on their actual essence. Heroes' and models' picturisation in many people's heads don't actually mirror their own values, and instances abound among people once glorified, and then loathed because of wrongdoings. Tiger Woods' sexual affairs and mental instability embody this part of the arguing; and permits shifting the debate into a perception more realistic. While heroes were once considered as such when they sacrificed themselves for God, the philosopher Tocqueville brought forth an idea of the hero paired with egalitarianism. Chivalrous atitudes and astonishing performances aren't amount for a humanbeing to be perfect; and making mistakes or having defects when being viewed as heroes shouldn't either divest these people of their oustanding character.
To conclude, one can't repudiate the potential harmful consequences for public figures to be subjected to media scrutiny. Though, it only consistutes a part of the influence over the laity and don't supplant the unique ability of our species to think by ourselves as highlighted by the philosopher Descartes in his statement "Cogito ergo sum".
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 182, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...rs or models achievements and failures. Some of the contemporary medias idiosyncrasies are ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 273, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...r a social activist, and to subsequently ,and mistakenly hate this person due to s...
^^
Line 5, column 618, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
... authors claim. Citizens as individuals shouldnt be deprived of their cognitive skills, ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 405, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...els picturisation in many peoples heads dont actually mirror their own values, and i...
^^^^
Line 7, column 906, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...s atitudes and astonishing performances arent amount for a humanbeing to be perfect; ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1017, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...ing defects when being viewed as heroes shouldnt either divest these people of their ous...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 18, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...standing character. To conclude, one cant repudiate the potential harmful consequ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 193, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...art of the influence over the laity and dont supplant the unique ability of our spec...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, if, regarding, so, still, then, while, as to, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 41.0 14.8657303371 276% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 58.6224719101 131% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3330.0 2235.4752809 149% => OK
No of words: 618.0 442.535393258 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38834951456 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98594081286 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07690243239 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 348.0 215.323595506 162% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563106796117 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 1061.1 704.065955056 151% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 14.0 1.77640449438 788% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.7670872174 60.3974514979 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.75 118.986275619 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.75 23.4991977007 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.08333333333 5.21951772744 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 7.80617977528 102% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176518791341 0.243740707755 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0469405910414 0.0831039109588 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.036348465243 0.0758088955206 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0917771796188 0.150359130593 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0287039594264 0.0667264976115 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 14.1392134831 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.1639044944 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.45 8.38706741573 125% => OK
difficult_words: 218.0 100.480337079 217% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.