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.
Scandals often reveal something surprised us in that we have no access to knowing the detail of everything in the daily life. However, scandals usually fall into beneficial and futile. Just like lawyers, there are good and bad lawyers working in the court. In my opinion, most of the scandals are useful, but some of them cannot change anything unless we fully understand the whole process of the event, such as extramarital affairs about singers and actresses.
People nowadays are busy working and studying, and they spend time enjoying delicious food or playing cellphone or Switch with latest technology. Hence, it’s likely that they don’t have enough concentration focusing on the social issue until person involved in scandal is a well-known entertainers or politicians. Take Taiwanese actress, Ko-Chun-Dong, for example, the movie he was starred in went viral during the summer vacation many years ago, attracting lots of films to invite him and advertisers to endorse their products. Nevertheless, he was revealed that he took drug with his some friends in Bei-Jing. Through this event, every company refused to hire him anymore even cut off his part in the upcoming movie. Many fans of Ko were juvenile, and they were disappointed at his inadequate behavior. In this case, the scandal erupted not only educated teenagers not to use drugs but affect profoundly than teachers’ and parents’ warning.
Some may argue that scandals aren’t necessarily influential than speakers or reformers are. As we known, many governments all over the world are risk adverse, and they don’t tend to make such dramatic changes. The government in Taiwan is also rather conservative. From a long time ago, military court had been overridden over the ordinary court in Taiwan before the event of a soldier, called Hong- Chung-Chiu. Many people advocated abolishing the military court for several times for the society has changed dramatically and the military system sometimes isn’t transparent at all. However, once the soldier was dead because of their arbitrary penalty, the government rapidly legislated to settle the fierce argument. In this case, we can observe that scandal plays an important role in making impact on some issues.
On the other hand, it must exist some scandals that are helpless to the social issue, such as extramarital affairs. Sometimes, this kind of event may distract people’s attention, and it’s likely that we lose focus on more crucial events. Even though, we figure out why caused the model decided to divorce her husband, there’s no help to solve other thorny problems.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 123, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'with the latest'.
Suggestion: with the latest
...ous food or playing cellphone or Switch with latest technology. Hence, it's likely tha...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 296, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'entertainer'?
Suggestion: entertainer
...son involved in scandal is a well-known entertainers or politicians. Take Taiwanese actress,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 10, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'argues'.
Suggestion: argues
... and parents' warning. Some may argue that scandals aren't necessarily i...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 104, Rule ID: PRP_PAST_PART[1]
Message: Possible grammatical error. You used a past participle without using any required verb ('be' or 'have'). Did you mean 'knew'?
Suggestion: knew
...l than speakers or reformers are. As we known, many governments all over the world ar...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 272, Rule ID: CONFUSION_OF_OUR_OUT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'our'?
Suggestion: our
... crucial events. Even though, we figure out why caused the model decided to divorce...
^^^
Line 7, column 382, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...no help to solve other thorny problems.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, well, for example, kind of, such as, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 37.0 33.0505617978 112% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2233.0 2235.4752809 100% => OK
No of words: 419.0 442.535393258 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32935560859 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52432199235 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8018503529 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 215.323595506 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.64200477327 0.4932671777 130% => OK
syllable_count: 701.1 704.065955056 100% => 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: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.0674732976 60.3974514979 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.333333333 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9523809524 23.4991977007 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.85714285714 5.21951772744 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => 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: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0784499677861 0.243740707755 32% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0238216933516 0.0831039109588 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0209064966397 0.0758088955206 28% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.046919096262 0.150359130593 31% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0100257837064 0.0667264976115 15% => 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: 13.63 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 100.480337079 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => 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.
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.