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 author takes a hand on supporting scandals. He claims so because they direct our attention on ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. I respect the statement put forth by the author. However, I stand a side opposing the claim that scandals are useful.I believe that they bring forward numerous riots and unbalance in the society.
Firstly, scandals are not likely to be true. There is no authenticity on creating a libel on the organisation or the person associated with it. It simply creates a sensation to asperson the idea or the topic associated with the scandal. For example, not so far there was a scandal about the Reserve Minister, Raghuram Krishnan who was accused of looting money on laundering. His case was never clearly stated and from just an anamolous source of fact, he was confronted of involving in the money launder issue. It indeed, spoiled his reputation though the scandal was true or not in the first place. Later, an investigation was held on the same and he was pronounced not guilty. Imagine the scenario, until the verdict was out he was literally thrown down of dignity and image. He was threated of the accuse. So, I clearly can state that scandals are just a piece of social nuisence that are played over the big shots.
Secondly, the scandals and scams relating to any political or social affairs generally evoke people into riots and create a law and order problem. These are very cleverly used as a scheme by the politicians of an opposition party to stir up revolts against the ruling party, misleading the people into traps of hopelessness. So the idea of scandals if hadn't been evolving would supress a lot of such unrest and aid the common in not falling a trap for the cunning political minds
Thirdly, scandals are generally used a means to becloud people from another major issue or a problem predominantly affecting the people at stake. For example, when the scam about the 3G spectrum in India was at its peak the innocent public were diverted into a scandal of the actor Amir Khan calling India an Intolerable Nation. This was clearly an evasive way to conceal the much bigger picture of 3G spectrum scam behind. The public were fooled diverting them into a pointlessly silly controversy of an actor's speech.
Thus, I conclude saying that though scandals may in some way truly alarm attention to problems not on the scope of thought by reformers or media they spoil the reputation whatsoever of the body or the person connected with the scandal. Also, because there is no evidence of proof to support the claim of the scandals it turns a no point of approach to be believed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 261, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: I
...sing the claim that scandals are useful.I believe that they bring forward numerou...
^
Line 3, column 798, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...f dignity and image. He was threated of the accuse. So, I clearly can state that scandals ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 353, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hadn't
...opelessness. So the idea of scandals if hadnt been evolving would supress a lot of su...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 506, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'actors'' or 'actor's'?
Suggestion: actors'; actor's
...o a pointlessly silly controversy of an actors speech. Thus, I conclude saying that...
^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'firstly', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'then', 'third', 'thirdly', 'thus', 'for example', 'in the first place']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.244444444444 0.240241500013 102% => OK
Verbs: 0.159595959596 0.157235817809 102% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0525252525253 0.0880659088768 60% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0707070707071 0.0497285424764 142% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0424242424242 0.0444667217837 95% => OK
Prepositions: 0.137373737374 0.12292977631 112% => OK
Participles: 0.0646464646465 0.0406280797675 159% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.58179902388 2.79330140395 92% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0181818181818 0.030933414821 59% => OK
Particles: 0.0020202020202 0.0016655270985 121% => OK
Determiners: 0.141414141414 0.0997080785238 142% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00808080808081 0.0249443105267 32% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00606060606061 0.0148568991511 41% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2634.0 2732.02544248 96% => OK
No of words: 458.0 452.878318584 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.75109170306 6.0361032391 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.58838876751 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.349344978166 0.366273622748 95% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.266375545852 0.280924506359 95% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.172489082969 0.200843997647 86% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.089519650655 0.132149295362 68% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58179902388 2.79330140395 92% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 219.290929204 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.552401746725 0.48968727796 113% => OK
Word variations: 66.2678116381 55.4138127331 120% => OK
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6194690265 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.8181818182 23.380412469 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.7785034536 59.4972553346 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.727272727 141.124799967 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8181818182 23.380412469 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.681818181818 0.674092028746 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.21349557522 77% => OK
Readability: 47.4557364033 51.4728631049 92% => OK
Elegance: 1.63703703704 1.64882698954 99% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.338582714823 0.391690518653 86% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.111335513249 0.123202303941 90% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0757354468096 0.077325440228 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.528445783675 0.547984918172 96% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.135547232489 0.149214159877 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135422303076 0.161403998019 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0740629565971 0.0892212321368 83% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.36218073155 0.385218514788 94% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0214511811412 0.0692045440612 31% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.250118864361 0.275328986314 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0892855397642 0.0653680567796 137% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.4325221239 58% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 5.30420353982 283% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88274336283 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 3.0 7.22455752212 42% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 3.66592920354 246% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 13.5995575221 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.