The emergence of the online “blogosphere” and social media has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States. Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political topics will inevitably decline.
Write a response in which you examine your own position on the statement. Explore the extent to which you either agree or disagree with it, and support your reasoning with evidence and/or examples. Be sure to reflect on ways in which the statement might or might not be true, and how this informs your thinking on the subject.
The author states that since everybody has access to write blogs about politics, so quality of the political exposure will eventually decline in the United states. I am totally disagree with the author’s point of view because the author makes an assumption that due to emergence of online Blogosphere, most of the people writes their opinions about politics and everybody reads their opinions through this online tool. Also, the author states that standards for covering news and political topics will inevitably decline because everybody has got access to publish their opinions online but the author fails to mention the key points.
Firstly, the author assumes that the whoever writes the blog or use social media, everybody reads their blog. What if your blog/post has a few followers and people don’t agree with their opinion on Political stance. I would agree with the author if he/she mentions about the type of bloggers people follow or reads their opinions. For example, a famous Political blogger , David Bucherman has 10 million followers for his blogs. He writes about political nuances like every companigns and meetings held by political parties. People read their blogs and changes their opinions.so, if the author would have explicitly mentioned about the kind of people who influences the political exposure, I would have agreed with the author.
Secondly, the standard for covering news will not be degraded by the online blogs and social media. The power of visualisation is always greater than the power of reading. Social Media and online blogs can’t match the the unbiased opinions provide through the news channel. Recently, the Bloomsberg provides the comparison data between the number of people’s opinions affected by the News channel and the famous bloggers. The result clearly states that the people are not affected by the bloggers opinions. They are still influenced by the opinions of the news channel.
In conclusion, the political discussion doesn’t get affected by the emergence of online blogs and social media. The political debate is totally based on news coverage rather than online blogs.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 178, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'disagreed'.
Suggestion: disagreed
...line in the United states. I am totally disagree with the author's point of view be...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 375, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... For example, a famous Political blogger , David Bucherman has 10 million follower...
^^
Line 2, column 630, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e author would have explicitly mentioned about the kind of people who influences ...
^^
Line 3, column 219, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...Media and online blogs can't match the the unbiased opinions provide through the n...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 219, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...Media and online blogs can't match the the unbiased opinions provide through the n...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 377, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...een the number of people's opinions affected by the News channel and the fam...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, still, for example, in conclusion, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 19.5258426966 26% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 58.6224719101 67% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1817.0 2235.4752809 81% => OK
No of words: 340.0 442.535393258 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34411764706 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57114687655 2.79657885939 92% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 215.323595506 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.494117647059 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 562.5 704.065955056 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.2486496084 60.3974514979 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.882352941 118.986275619 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 23.4991977007 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.58823529412 5.21951772744 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.332521210007 0.243740707755 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124610844449 0.0831039109588 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0851032570986 0.0758088955206 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232902558449 0.150359130593 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578436886263 0.0667264976115 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.1392134831 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 100.480337079 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 11.8971910112 164% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.