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.Write a response in which you discuss which view
more closely aligns with your own position and
explain your reasoning for the position you take. In
developing and supporting your position, you should
address both of the views presented.
Under this context, the speaker offers two opposing viewpoints. The former one claims that it is often necessary or even desirable for political leaders to withhold information from the public, while the latter one asserts that the public should be informed of the information. In my point of view, it should be discussed case by case. In some cases, the former one raises valid points, while under other scenarios, the latter one will be more persuasive.
For starters, some kind of information should not be transparent to the mass. The first reason is that common people may not have professional knowledge about such information so that they will not offer any help, which means that it is unnecessary to tell them such information. For instance, the information about cutting edge tech and the bottom line of negotiation is belong to this kind of information. Besides, the information concerning some confidentiality should be withheld from the public since it will be inimical to the whole country once it is divulged. For example, the military deployment and confidentiality as well as the information concerning the national defense should not inform the public in case of the damages its revelation may bring to the country.
However, it does not mean that all information should be secret to the mass. Some information regarding the livelihood issue should always be transparent to the public. Otherwise, it may engender some panic and be harmful to the well-being of the citizens. For instance, several years ago, a milk powder enterprise named SanLu was covered that the milk powder it sold was poisonous. Its sensational and notorious behavior ravaged many babies’ lives. If this lucid information has been withheld to the public, the business may escape the punishment of the laws and may threaten more babies’ lives. Eventually, this issue propelled the reform of formula industry in the whole country. And the issue of SARS can also be taken as an example. The outbreak of SARS in southern China resulted in an eventual 8098 cases. To avoid panic of the masses, Chinese government choose to disguise it. However, this behavior failed to assuage the pubic. On the contrast, it engendered a wide-spearing panic among the mass due to the unknown impacts of this virus. From the two aforementioned cases, we can conclude that the government has the obligation to publish some kinds of information concerning the living issues to the citizens for the sake of better lives.
To sum up, the information regarding some confidentiality should be withheld by the government, while the ones about living issues should always be transparent to the public.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 373, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'belonged'.
Suggestion: belonged
...h and the bottom line of negotiation is belong to this kind of information. Besides, t...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 941, Rule ID: PUBIC_X[1]
Message: Did you mean 'public'?
Suggestion: public
...er, this behavior failed to assuage the pubic. On the contrast, it engendered a wide-...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, however, if, may, regarding, so, well, while, for example, for instance, kind of, as well as, in some cases, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 12.9106741573 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2249.0 2235.4752809 101% => OK
No of words: 436.0 442.535393258 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15825688073 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56953094068 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91352209835 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481651376147 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 699.3 704.065955056 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 12.0 4.99550561798 240% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.045081943 60.3974514979 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.7826086957 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9565217391 23.4991977007 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.08695652174 5.21951772744 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 10.2758426966 29% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24363686843 0.243740707755 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0682473479977 0.0831039109588 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.067336849436 0.0758088955206 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162100200683 0.150359130593 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.048273917417 0.0667264976115 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 100.480337079 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.