Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
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 and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Although the above mentioned claim sounds like emphasising the positive effects of a disaster and it may seem to be true. Since, it is human tendency to be indifferent to their obligations. Often people tend to be cautious and work carefully only when they are in pressure of a trouble. Like, students study bundle of books by staying awake whole night before exam and they never try to read a single chapter normally. The fear of occurrence of scandals does motivate police, politicians, normal public to work effectively. The government of any country makes new initiatives, stringent rules to protect it’s people from becoming victims of a scam.
But, firstly, scams do create severe damage in terms of money and lives. To exemplify, many countries have been suffering from the scams done by giant corporates. Like in United States, company WorldCom in 2002, recorded it’s expenses of nearly 3.8 billion USD as future investments and exaggerated it’s profits even though the company’s profits were decreasing continuously. Due to this many of it’s employees lost their jobs and the investors lost their money. Food processing industries prone to do scandals to fake that they meet stringent nutritional standards. For example, India banned Nestle company’s Maggie (instant noodles) after finding that the product contains more than permitted amount of lead. Many Chemical industries does fake that they follow environmental regulatory rules. The harmful chemical spills in Vedanta, a chemical industry in Tamil Nadu of India caused large number of deaths in past two years, this company is accused of submitting wrong records about the production of harmful chemical to environmental board.
Secondly the claim in some sense exhort people to do unethical practices. Like, frauds can justify their mistakes by above mentioned claim. We often see terrorists justifying their criminal actions such as causing genocide and pronouncing that they are not guilty of creating such disasters.
To indulge positivity in people we can figure out positive effects of scandals and say that scandals remind people to stay responsible, but we cannot claim that they are very useful to people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 123, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... a disaster and it may seem to be true. Since, it is human tendency to be indifferent...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 759, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[2]
Message: You should probably use 'do'.
Suggestion: do
...mount of lead. Many Chemical industries does fake that they follow environmental reg...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 12.9106741573 23% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1869.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 347.0 442.535393258 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38616714697 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31600926901 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80267922497 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.631123919308 0.4932671777 128% => OK
syllable_count: 576.0 704.065955056 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.4152461092 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.833333333 118.986275619 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2777777778 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.21951772744 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 5.13820224719 272% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.073267750309 0.243740707755 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0235966025103 0.0831039109588 28% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0235853373271 0.0758088955206 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0525771691843 0.150359130593 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0251661922145 0.0667264976115 38% => 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: 13.6 14.1392134831 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 100.480337079 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.