Scandals are usually used as weapons to tarnish someone’s reputation. The result is almost irreversible and can cause collateral damage. Scandals are often being disseminated through mass media to the general public by sensationalist journalism. The author stated that scandals are useful because they draw the audience’s attention on problems that no reformer or speaker could. I agree with the author that scandals, as a unique style of mass communication, have the ability to elicit people’s emotions and anger that no individual could. But I would not consider scandals as a useful piece of information.
Scandals often let people overlook the essence of the sensation news. In fact, scandals focus on generating emotion more than telling what is the truth. Media professionals are fans of scandals because stories with anecdotes are solid indicators of good sales. Thus, scandals are frequently being used as an effective tool to boost companies’ profits. This phenomenon exacerbates when such distorted stories are being told and they only bring out the negative emotions of the public to the point where it is hard to let the true story being heard. Therefore, I would consider scandals are a powerful medium to gather attention but I would not describe such medium as useful since it does not serve any public interest.
Secondly, scandals cause irreversible damage to someone’s fame. It takes one years of collection of effort to build up his/her reputation. But it only costs overnight to destroy such hard work. Although scandals sometimes reveal public figures' personal misconducts and wrongdoings, they often exaggerate the negative side of the narrative. It is important and prudent to note that everything has two sides and even the saints make some mistakes. Paying an excessive amount of attention to scandals would not teach us how to forgive others for their mistakes. And the physical and psychological damage caused by scandals would follow the victims in the long-term. In this case, scandals are no doubt a great strategy to grab attention from the public but they also cause trauma to the subjects of attention.
The last but not the least, scandals often overshadow the truth and the real stories that deserve to be heard. Perhaps the public needs to hear more journalistic stories rather than celebrities’ scandals. Compared to scandals, journalistic reports are less biased and contain more educational value. A thriving society needs to be nourished with factual and healthy information. A society with a notorious culture that focuses on sandals would not cast any benefits to its next generation. Therefore, scandals should not be considered as useful.
In sum, scandals have the power to gather attention and get its content spread across the society in an effective way no other content could. But the lack of educational value and the positive effect would deem scandals as less valuable information.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 207, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... disseminated through mass media to the general public by sensationalist journalism. The autho...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...als as a useful piece of information. Scandals often let people overlook the e...
^^^
Line 4, column 80, Rule ID: ONE_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use the numeral 'one' with plural words. Did you mean 'one year', 'a year', or simply 'years'?
Suggestion: one year; a year; years
...damage to someone's fame. It takes one years of collection of effort to build up his...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 100, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an effective way" with adverb for "effective"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...t its content spread across the society in an effective way no other content could. But the lack of...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, in fact, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 58.6224719101 90% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2505.0 2235.4752809 112% => OK
No of words: 471.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31847133758 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65859790218 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94603870844 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51804670913 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 776.7 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 20.2370786517 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.6509438293 60.3974514979 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 89.4642857143 118.986275619 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8214285714 23.4991977007 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.60714285714 5.21951772744 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 20.0 5.13820224719 389% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.202738509778 0.243740707755 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0554564304238 0.0831039109588 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0547448730031 0.0758088955206 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120917505598 0.150359130593 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0511333192694 0.0667264976115 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.1392134831 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.8420337079 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.28 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 100.480337079 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.