Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through large quantities of information and find what’s important.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
The issue at hand here is that the overall effect of internet and mass media has been positive. It agrees that though people are less focused on one thing, they make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through large quantities of information effectively, while finding what's important. I totally disagree with the presented conclusion about the effect of the internet and mass media as it undermines the possible consequences.
Firstly, due to accessibility of internet to a larger population now-a-days, many uninformed people are being fed with plethora of information. They either don't relate to it or don't know the circumstances where it was generated. This results in the fact that they don't understand the crux of the information. The issue agrees to this fact but undermines the impact of such a situation. Our present generation is major victim of this impatient attitude and everyone wants quick results in all spheres of life. Take the example of the entertainment industry. The upcoming actors and actresses are doing bizarre things like getting into public spat with respected journalists to get media limelight and attention even if it is against their personal ethics.
Secondly, undivided focus is a very important component to achieve realistic goals in life. Not only it requires consistent hard work but also undeterred perseverance in the path to achieve such an goal. But due to the digital era of internet and mass media based social network, people have started following the trend to do things which makes them famous and gives recognition in society of mass appreciation. They totally ignore the things that actually interest them and follow a trend set which they observe in the internet. Recently, we such a case of producing poor quality videos intentionally put up in Youtube. This was deliberately done to grab mass attention without thinking of the ramifications of such actions.
Lastly, making up for a gap on lack of skill, resulting from lack of focus, requires time and devotion to the peripheral skills involved. How can one is expected to excel in all fields when he or she is not able to substantially good even in one field? When a person is not able to learn a skill or lesson properly, then clearly he or she lacks the ability to identify the most important part of it. For example, we cannot expect from a 12 year old to go through social media and expect him or her to segregate information based on what is good or what is bad. Due to lack of experience, these children take in all information presented to them. Lack of regulations on internet contributes more to this.
Contrary to this, we can say that authorized guidance can help in such cases. but is it really possible to do such scrutinization all round the clock? Also, it can be pointed out that with time, people will learn the correct use of internet and ignore the bad stuff. But we cannot say this for each individual. Moral sets for all vary. Also, immediate implications of the bad things reflect in the real life society. These are more harmful than not.
In the end, I would say that extreme regulations are needed in the present day internet. People need to be made aware about the use of mass media and the authentication of information presented to them. Hence, the irregularities can then be muted.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 277, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
... information effectively, while finding whats important. I totally disagree with the ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 157, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...th plethora of information. They either dont relate to it or dont know the circumsta...
^^^^
Line 3, column 178, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ation. They either dont relate to it or dont know the circumstances where it was gen...
^^^^
Line 3, column 265, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ted. This results in the fact that they dont understand the crux of the information....
^^^^
Line 5, column 196, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...erseverance in the path to achieve such an goal. But due to the digital era of int...
^^
Line 9, column 79, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: But
...orized guidance can help in such cases. but is it really possible to do such scruti...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, really, second, secondly, so, then, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 14.8657303371 155% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 33.0505617978 148% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 88.0 58.6224719101 150% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 12.9106741573 155% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2768.0 2235.4752809 124% => OK
No of words: 569.0 442.535393258 129% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86467486819 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.88402711743 4.55969084622 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80047195743 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 293.0 215.323595506 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514938488576 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 878.4 704.065955056 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 6.24550561798 240% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 2.0 0.740449438202 270% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 32.0 20.2370786517 158% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.7292366647 60.3974514979 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.5 118.986275619 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.78125 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.4375 5.21951772744 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.325029484502 0.243740707755 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0651282418953 0.0831039109588 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.077607940456 0.0758088955206 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167276370549 0.150359130593 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.134304540487 0.0667264976115 201% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 14.1392134831 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.8420337079 128% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.1743820225 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.61 12.1639044944 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 100.480337079 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.