Nowadays, there is a trend that reports of media focus on problems and emergencies rather than positive development. Some people think it is harmful to individuals and to society. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is a trend that the media reports have a greater preference for he information mainly exploiting shocking issues than the pieces of optimistic news. This is believed to bring about the harmful consequence to either the individuals or society. From my personal perspective, its benefit and detriment are mostly in equilibrium and several reasons will be put forward to prove my opinion in the following paragraphs.
One the one hand, there are several advantages when media reports are covered by the problems and emergent news. More specifically, such platforms of media as television, newspaper, radio are regarded as the tools to deliver all the social information to citizens. It is true that thanks to them, the latest news provision are constantly updated. The topical news which can be unemployment, inflation or pollution, crime are well informed in community.
On the other hand, when colossal numbers of positive developments are not daily mentioned because content related to the emergencies is more favorable, I believe that it is conducive to the poor upshot. In a small scale, as for the individuals, it can exert a negative impact which is exposed by their pessimistic thoughts or attitudes after watching or reading the news. An example is a series of shocking accidents on the street, which probably exacerbates readers’ mood and makes them feel insecure when commuting. In a larger scale, people can miss out on the positive things such as the development of the quality of. This can lead to a prevalent thought that life is meaningless and not worth living.
In conclusion, although this trend has pros and cons, I strongly concur that the positive content published on mass media should be more focused on than the negative one.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 64, Rule ID: HE_THE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'for the information'?
Suggestion: for the information
...media reports have a greater preference for he information mainly exploiting shocking issues than ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 172, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... more focused on than the negative one.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, well, as for, in conclusion, such as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1479.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 288.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13541666667 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91239559965 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 176.041082164 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59375 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 467.1 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.745801914 49.4020404114 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.769230769 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1538461538 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.76923076923 7.06120827912 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.150612820063 0.244688304435 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0490767263876 0.084324248473 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0537404327018 0.0667982634062 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0933362859662 0.151304729494 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0352089641482 0.056905535591 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.0946893788 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.5 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.