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
The argument regards scandals as beneficial since it more effectively draw attention from the general public as compared to other ways. I strongly disagree with it for two reasons: first, most scandals are not based on truthful information but on intentional distortion of reality; second, scandals deviate the attention of public from what really matters; And finally, more reliable sources should be depend upon to generate public attention and remain high transparency of government and other institutions in both the public and private sector.
To begin with, in most of the times, scandals are misinformation that merely serves to attract people’s attention and cause unnecessary panics or anger. We now live in an information age where news rapidly disseminate and influence people attitudes and choices at a daily basis. This property of information dissemination is sometimes misused and can cause damages to the society. For example, in 2011 when the Furukuma nuclear pollution occurs, rumor has it that there would soon be a shortage of sea salt in food market due to the polluted sea water. This rumor rapidly spreads in many countries near Japan and many citizens run out of their house and started buy much more salts to prevent a shortage of salt supply in the near future, as the rumor suggested. It turned out that it was a misinformation made up by manchents who want to gain a profit from the crisis. Therefore, scandals can do more harm than good because it attracts public attention by sending out untruthful messages and can sometimes cause undesired consequences.
When it comes to scandals about political figures, one might argue that it can serve as a warning messages for those with power. I agree with this claim to the extent that the scandals have realistic basis and are related to public affairs. However, in most of the cases, scandals about governmental officials are about their private life instead of things pertinent to the rights of citizens or development of the economy. Meanwhile, in order to deal with the inflammatory scandals, politics need to spare their time, as well as energy, that could have been more productively spend on their work. Therefore, if scandals play any role in influencing public opinions, it does so by deviating the valuable attention away from what truly matters.
Admittedly, reforms and speaks tend to emphasize on what is credible and to avoid what is questionable. However, scandals are by no means the right way to address with this challenge. We should establish more reliable channels and platforms on which a diverse set of opinions can be communicated.
In conclusion, scandals can be more detrimental than beneficial if they are based on misinformation and have little relevance to the actual interests of the people. All stakeholders, ranging from the state, medias, and the mass, should encourage aboveboard dialogues in order to guarantee transparency and raise awareness of the challenges we faced.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 95, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ore effectively draw attention from the general public as compared to other ways. I strongly d...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 403, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'depended'?
Suggestion: depended
...inally, more reliable sources should be depend upon to generate public attention and r...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 99, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'message'?
Suggestion: message
...ht argue that it can serve as a warning messages for those with power. I agree with this...
^^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 351, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e awareness of the challenges we faced.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, really, second, so, therefore, well, while, for example, in conclusion, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 78.0 58.6224719101 133% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 12.9106741573 155% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2523.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 485.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20206185567 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89065546934 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548453608247 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 789.3 704.065955056 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.0170800652 60.3974514979 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.789473684 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5263157895 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.89473684211 5.21951772744 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => 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: 0.149737050968 0.243740707755 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0459827902187 0.0831039109588 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0405736844433 0.0758088955206 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0848195907431 0.150359130593 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0346421611297 0.0667264976115 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 14.1392134831 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 100.480337079 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 11.8971910112 160% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.