Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Scandals are the evidences or warrants of some events, cause or of some personal life. They are meant to keep the eye of public or for the publicity. Scandals has both good and bad purpose. In the above assertion, I mostly agree that scandal are useful because they focus attention on problems and no ways like speaker or reformer ever could but in some extent the scandal are not useful they are used as calumny.
Scandals helps to clear the misconception or obscurity. There are many events or occurrence that we are bemused of. It may be in politics, we have lots of confusion about the politician sayings. They often try to hide the truth and represent the phantasmagorical things. For such matters, scandals help to make clear the reality of politician what are his motives. Moreover, we can know the politicians’ real aims and what is the true behind the sayings. Hence, to reveal the real face of the person or to know what are their motives, scandal are useful thing rather that discussion of speakers.
To take as the evidence or proof, the scandals are very much crucial. It can be prominent during the advocacy or at court while two-party are there with their own opinion. The judges test the two parties and decides who of them are correct or genuine. By just judging their opinion is incomplete, and if there is some scandal presented by the opposing party considering as a proof it will be taken as strongly. Of course, it is true that whose opinion is cohesive, well integrated with real evidences and scandals will be considered more ingenuous. However, by just speaking and elaborating the events with evidence will be arbitrary. So, scandals are useful for the evidences or the proofs.
However, in some extent scandal could be taken as harmful since, it attacks the person with misleading objective or with vindictive purpose. Sometimes we see the scandals of celebrities beings exposed in a negative way. Mostly the scandals are related to their personal life. Some might be done by the celebrity themselves for the motive of publicity stunt and to be disseminated. But not all are such, some are done by their offenders who might be jealous of the pride and they expose their personal scandal to hamper them and that might be impeding to their successful career. In such purpose, the scandals can be taken as deleterious rather than being harmful.
To sum up, the scandals are helpful which provides or focus on more attention which could not be call forth by speaker because it works are real or genuine evidence, in knowing the real motive and purpose of a person but it could also be harmful in such a way that not all thing the scandal will be true and its includes personal activities of which we should judge by.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 202, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a negative way" with adverb for "negative"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... scandals of celebrities beings exposed in a negative way. Mostly the scandals are related to the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, may, moreover, so, well, while, of course, it is true, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 39.0 19.5258426966 200% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 30.0 14.8657303371 202% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2281.0 2235.4752809 102% => OK
No of words: 478.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.7719665272 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67581127817 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60240366932 2.79657885939 93% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458158995816 0.4932671777 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 726.3 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 69.1582995742 60.3974514979 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.24 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.12 23.4991977007 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.8 5.21951772744 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.261729789533 0.243740707755 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0722614078958 0.0831039109588 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.129452862272 0.0758088955206 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.179554572099 0.150359130593 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.165542884098 0.0667264976115 248% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 14.1392134831 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.39 12.1639044944 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.38706741573 91% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 100.480337079 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => 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.