Some people believe it is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information form the public. Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed.
The author infers that political leaders should keep some information as a confidence. Some people may believe that public has a right to fully informed. However, the following essay will argue that it is plausible to disagree with the author’s statement and present following reasons to support this point of view
There might have some information that people not need to know. To illustrate, classified information of national security should only approval to someone who have authority to access. Likewise, business confidential document shouldn’t reveal openly to the public. If those important information can damage critically to both country and business. For example, Cisco accuses three former employees of stealing trade secret and they harmed enormous money. Moreover, US and Russia had spy projects secretly to damage national security. Accordingly, certain examples seem to indicate that sometimes hiding information is beneficial for society.
However, governments not always act within legal framework so public have right to know all the information to keep government to be transparent and accountable. For instance, South Korea president Park had impeachment by the public because she used national money illegally and give her friend a power to intervene the government official work. Moreover, without watching governmental work will lead collapse the country economy and leaders might abuse their power as their profits. Therefore, in most circumstances leaders should not withhold information from the public in order to maintain the well-being of democratic society and fairness of politics
In sum, considering the complexity of international politics and need to keep safe on the business the issue of the government keeping serious information is need for the society. Yet, other minor information should fully accessible to the public to keep government transparency.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, however, if, likewise, may, moreover, so, therefore, well, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 19.5258426966 26% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 33.0505617978 42% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 58.6224719101 61% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1639.0 2235.4752809 73% => OK
No of words: 285.0 442.535393258 64% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.75087719298 5.05705443957 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.55969084622 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99490898692 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 215.323595506 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.614035087719 0.4932671777 124% => OK
syllable_count: 505.8 704.065955056 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 6.24550561798 16% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.869820033 60.3974514979 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.071428571 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3571428571 23.4991977007 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.92857142857 5.21951772744 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => 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: 0.315881640706 0.243740707755 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109609226157 0.0831039109588 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.12215761998 0.0758088955206 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.184164921136 0.150359130593 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.056618675225 0.0667264976115 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 14.1392134831 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 48.8420337079 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 12.1743820225 111% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.07 12.1639044944 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.39 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 100.480337079 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.7820224719 136% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
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.