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.
This topic raises the controversial issue of whether sandals are better than speakers or reformers in drawing our attention towards a problem in a effective way. Indisputably, scandals often unethically flash the personal conversations and properties of individuals to pulic for drawing their attention to mass problems and speaker or reformers can do the same good work without any unethical action. Nevertheless, these personal contents are the actual evidence for the problems which speakers can not simply gather and spread. Thus, I generally disagree with the opinion that speakers or reformers do a better job in raising attention against a problem and would argue that scandals do perfrom better in drawing public awareness.
First of all, scandal reveals actual data for a problem. I would like to point out that public don't believe in simple talks without evidence. So, scandals do actually provide the evidence that normal speakers would have a hard time to gather. To illustrate, let us look at the example of ball temparing in cricket match. In this circumstance, obviously, if umpare reported that a player has tempared the ball, there would have been a court discussion and the result would have taken time to tak place. Consequently, it is obvious that as there was cameras capturing the scene of temparing, the scandal helped to get the punishment quickly.
Furthermore, scandals are not people that would have the fear of anything. Specifically, speakers often time don't speak all the truth in fear but scandals actually reveal the truth. Both common sense and personal experience have told us that scandals have actually raised the question against many people who were vitually untouchable. Hence, all the evidence above proved that scandals do the better job in raising public opinion.
Admittedly, it is true that speakers can motivate people in a way that scandals can't. This is specially true when people need some hero among them to raise hand against a problem. However, I would still argue that scadals are better than speakers. Because, they raise awareness among both the supporters and opponents of the topic in question.
In conclusion, although speaks have some upperhand in some cases, scandals do beat them in most other cases. As long as some measurements are performed and some areas are included, scandals will always be the better option.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 143, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a effective way" with adverb for "effective"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...drawing our attention towards a problem in a effective way. Indisputably, scandals often unethical...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 146, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...wing our attention towards a problem in a effective way. Indisputably, scandals o...
^
Line 5, column 96, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
.... I would like to point out that public dont believe in simple talks without evidenc...
^^^^
Line 9, column 31, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'peopled'.
Suggestion: peopled
...kly. Furthermore, scandals are not people that would have the fear of anything. S...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 110, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...hing. Specifically, speakers often time dont speak all the truth in fear but scandal...
^^^^
Line 13, column 81, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... motivate people in a way that scandals cant. This is specially true when people nee...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, look, nevertheless, so, still, thus, in conclusion, first of all, in some cases, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 58.6224719101 70% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2014.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 385.0 442.535393258 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23116883117 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4296068528 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70065676688 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 215.323595506 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537662337662 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 608.4 704.065955056 86% => 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: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.5761741666 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.7 118.986275619 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.25 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 5.21951772744 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.155898941594 0.243740707755 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0491020359549 0.0831039109588 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0407050616765 0.0758088955206 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0828002655521 0.150359130593 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0556241076229 0.0667264976115 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.1639044944 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 100.480337079 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.