Some people believe it is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed.
At the era of information transparency, people are requesting to gain more information around the world as their rights of citizens. But sometimes, it is inevitable to withhold information from the public out of safety concerns and maintaining public stability. And we should understand the political leaders choices’ for concealing the information. Whether keeping the information or not should be based on the influence to the public, so political leaders should consider carefully before disclosing the information.
Firstly, a perspective to advocate the fully clear information is that to maintain the average state of public health. For example, food safety issues should undoubtedly be made known to the public. Suppose that the government is deciding to hide the information of food with special contents, then the health of some certain allergic groups is brutally put in uncertainty by the authority. By disclosing such information, common forks may avoid unnecessary illness and maintain their health status at a certain extent. Furthermore, information being above board can be useful and effective sometimes. Events such as earthquakes and hurricanes should be informed, as the public may have enough time to prepare for the nature disasters and reduce the risk of injuries.
Secondly, revealing information about urban planning may exacerbate the corruption between politicians. If the total assets of a candidate were to make public, then he might be able to gain more trust, and receive more support in the election. Besides, government’s commitment of transparency may help build trust among the public and strengthen international cooperation. When outbreak was occurring in Ukraine, given the possibility of this outbreak would spread around the world. The government of Ukraine public its reports and shared the samples which made information transparent to other countries. In such condition, government information publicity helped prevented the deterioration of the epidemic.
However, it is true that disclosing information have shortcomings. A reason considering why to withhold information among the public is that it can maintain national safety. For instance, military weapons have being used as a political strategy to protect the country. Imagine that if a terrorist obtains the position of the nuclear weapons, they may take some measures to utilize these weapons to threat public safety. Moreover, leaking military strategies may put our country under serious conditions and making our country vulnerable to attacks. It is obvious that under certain circumstances, the disclosure of the national information will pose a threat to massive casualties of the citizens.
Information acts like a double-edged sword, and political leaders have to deliberately winnow the news before conveying to the folks. They not only need to prompt the development of the country but also have to assure the safety of millions of civilians. In a nutshell, political leaders should be honest with the public with the information that can be told, but keep information that relates to national security from the public to protect their country, only by this way can benefit both sides.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, for example, for instance, such as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 58.6224719101 121% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 12.9106741573 248% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2722.0 2235.4752809 122% => OK
No of words: 491.0 442.535393258 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54378818737 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70728369723 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08880135193 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 255.0 215.323595506 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.519348268839 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 847.8 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.9792590515 60.3974514979 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.88 118.986275619 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.64 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.04 5.21951772744 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
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: 0.329990564557 0.243740707755 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0911328325532 0.0831039109588 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0629890293696 0.0758088955206 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192190540583 0.150359130593 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0562474177244 0.0667264976115 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.85 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 139.0 100.480337079 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.