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.
Social media has allowed its users to make their lives and thoughts easily sharable. It’s cacophony of billions of voices expressing their opinion on current events and each other’s lives. Prior to the invention of Facebook and WordPress, people were limited to their sphere of friends and family. Now, the social network has connected the globe together. While this is an endearing thought, it expands a societal problem: the spread of misinformation.
Like a game of telephone, when one piece of information is shared from user to user on social media, the intended message tends to be completely different from what it was originally. An article could be completely factual and neutral, but people perceive it according to their perspective. Differentiation in opinion can be rooted in background, genetics, upbringing, or anything that can make an individual unique. This is certainly acceptable and it’s healthy for people to have differing perspectives on the news of the day. What’s unhealthy is to depend on a tertiary source of information that’s not accredited or completely encompassing of the situation.
While articles that emerge from national publications are reviewed and cited, anyone can post their opinion on social media and send it out to the world. It’s certainly much easier to express these erroneous thoughts, and since they are more accessible, people are influences by them. Just like gossip in local communities, people are more interested in the dramatic claims than the truth of the matter. Alternatively, in major news organizations, information from their sources are cross-references, proof read, and compiled into a single article that isn’t written to sway, but only to tell. In order to combat the decline of political discourse, people must consider the source of this information and seek certified publications that reports on the news in a non-partisan way.
While technology has made the spread of misinformation easier, it has also been a tool for awareness. Users in Libya used Twitter to stir outrage when their government were burning their citizens in the streets. Minorities weaponized social media to raise activism against police brutality. It does give a voice to those who otherwise wouldn’t, due to systemic social, political, and economic injustices. Social media is a platform for people to express their thoughts, but it shouldn’t be taken for fact, and it should be a responsibility for news organizations to upkeep a standard and to tell people where credible information can be found.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 640, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o tell people where credible information can be found.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2192.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 405.0 442.535393258 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41234567901 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48604634366 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.155116954 2.79657885939 113% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 215.323595506 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56049382716 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 685.8 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.77640449438 450% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.6590196867 60.3974514979 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.6 118.986275619 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 23.4991977007 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.2 5.21951772744 23% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218716143913 0.243740707755 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0599610186467 0.0831039109588 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0451528848994 0.0758088955206 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131992380345 0.150359130593 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0247082019835 0.0667264976115 37% => 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: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => 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: 14.1 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 100.480337079 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => 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: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.