Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Is there any scenario where scandals are also perceived as useful? While some critics in the critical stranding, including author of this argument, might argue that scandals are useful, for they focus our attention on problems in a way that no reformer - or advocate - ever could. However, as far as I am concerned, I believe that scandals might be useful sometimes, yet its not always true: in some cases they are really ruinous to the society.
Those critics who would argue that scandals are useful prefer to give example of Medical education in Nepal. On account of high profit in medical education, many private medical colleges, together with some politicians, started many unethical activities: for example, they started selling student quotas to the wealthier - rather than to the talents. Clearly, Dr. Gobinda KC, senior orthopaedic surgeon of TU teaching hospital, commenced his fast-unto-death protest against these scandals. Finally, he enjoyed huge support from journalists, social media enthusiasts, and the general public. Then what? Government agreed with Dr. KC to amend some fallacious point of Medical Education Act, and agreed to promote merit-based medical education. These days, due to the frequent protest of Dr. KC, there happens many discussions - in private and public spheres - regarding medical education. Therefore, some good things are going to happen, isn't it? Up to this point I also agree with critics. But my reservation is scandals may not always be useful.
In contrast, Scandals are scandals; by definition, scandals are activities for which one deserves no respect. Then there is not absolute chance for them to be useful: sometimes they are ruinous too. Lokman Singh Karki, the chief commissioner of Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority, was found to be involved in several scandals in recent days. Many people raised their voice; nobody, including the government, heard public, however. Finally, as Karki is among most powerful figure in Nepal, due to his influence, many people (especially from media) were jailed. Many people and TV programs have been banned, yet Karki is enjoying the comfortable chair as the chief commissioner. In this context, scandals and raising voice against it are proved to be disastrous to many people in Nepal.
Likewise, a former minister, named Khum Bahadur Khadka, in Nepal - who is still popular among general public - became the victim of media scandals. He is perceived as a competent and effective minister. Nevertheless, due to some unknown reasons, he always ignored media interviews, so that media always blamed him for different cases. Although these blames are yet to be proved authentic by the tribunal, the thing is these media scandals favored to degrade the party base of Khadka. He has done good, people also support him, but the medias seem to be enjoying discrediting his reputation.
Finally at the end of the day, it is clear that scandals might be, sometimes, useful in focusing public' attention to solve particular exigent problem. However, its not absolute; in many cases scandals do bad as well. The examples, presented above, are enough to shore up my argument.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 576, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ists, social media enthusiasts, and the general public. Then what? Government agreed with Dr. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 937, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
..., some good things are going to happen, isnt it? Up to this point I also agree with ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 95, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
..., in Nepal - who is still popular among general public - became the victim of media scandals. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Finally,
...njoying discrediting his reputation. Finally at the end of the day, it is clear that...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'however', 'if', 'likewise', 'may', 'nevertheless', 'really', 'regarding', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'therefore', 'thus', 'well', 'while', 'as to', 'for example', 'in contrast', 'in many cases', 'in some cases']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.236577181208 0.240241500013 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.145973154362 0.157235817809 93% => OK
Adjectives: 0.115771812081 0.0880659088768 131% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0587248322148 0.0497285424764 118% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0436241610738 0.0444667217837 98% => OK
Prepositions: 0.107382550336 0.12292977631 87% => OK
Participles: 0.0385906040268 0.0406280797675 95% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.75416850246 2.79330140395 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0335570469799 0.030933414821 108% => OK
Particles: 0.00167785234899 0.0016655270985 101% => OK
Determiners: 0.0637583892617 0.0997080785238 64% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.010067114094 0.0249443105267 40% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00838926174497 0.0148568991511 56% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3179.0 2732.02544248 116% => OK
No of words: 514.0 452.878318584 113% => OK
Chars per words: 6.18482490272 6.0361032391 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76146701107 4.58838876751 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.416342412451 0.366273622748 114% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.322957198444 0.280924506359 115% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.215953307393 0.200843997647 108% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.132295719844 0.132149295362 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75416850246 2.79330140395 99% => OK
Unique words: 285.0 219.290929204 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554474708171 0.48968727796 113% => OK
Word variations: 69.1469058755 55.4138127331 125% => OK
How many sentences: 28.0 20.6194690265 136% => OK
Sentence length: 18.3571428571 23.380412469 79% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3421963634 59.4972553346 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.535714286 141.124799967 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3571428571 23.380412469 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.785714285714 0.674092028746 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.21349557522 77% => OK
Readability: 50.6528627015 51.4728631049 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.54054054054 1.64882698954 93% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.22639549087 0.391690518653 58% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0765149463044 0.123202303941 62% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0681870043387 0.077325440228 88% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.421006145343 0.547984918172 77% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.162588445626 0.149214159877 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0723770109892 0.161403998019 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103247368549 0.0892212321368 116% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.301819262002 0.385218514788 78% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0485213297007 0.0692045440612 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171258866104 0.275328986314 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.137715751208 0.0653680567796 211% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.4325221239 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 17.0 5.30420353982 321% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88274336283 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 7.22455752212 69% => OK
Negative topic words: 14.0 3.66592920354 382% => Less negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 20.0 13.5995575221 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.