News stories on TV and in newspaper are very often accompanied by pictures. Some people say that these pictures are more effective than words.
What is your opinion about this?
Nowadays, with rapid growth of technology, news is speared anywhere at least time and everybody can follow the news in all the world. The manner of newscast is different, some people believe that watching or reading news with pictures are more effective while others think that words can convey their meaning alone and do not need to share them with images. This essay will shed some light on this argument from both sides and extend my partial support to the former view before arriving at conclusion.
Texts never can encourage people to follow and read news completely. Adding images or short clips can make news understandable and due to pictures people will be persuaded to read them fully. Without pictures newspaper and TV programs are terrible and the eyes of readers will get tired if they just see words or speaker’s face. Watching news, moreover, without any pictures is like listening to the radio or podcasts and it will be unprofitable if we watch TV for news. Sometimes in some news broadcast they just show the short clips or some pictures and they write on it “no comment”. It means that, pictures can bring messages and do not need any explanation. For instance, when they want to show something about destruction owing to earthquake or any other natural disasters, they just show pictures or short movies and it is obvious that the effects of these kinds of news are more than when the reporters want to explain. According to expert’s research, combination of news with media is more effective in individual’s mind. In my opinion, journals or gazette with attractive and flashy pictures on their first page on the counter of stores are selling more.
On the other hands, some people think that when they show images or short films alongside with the news, they really distract the concentration of watchers and they forgot the main subjects. Environmentalists for example, follow this issue on their point of view. They believe that, if journalists use lots of pictures for explaining their news, they waste more paper and even color, in reality they endanger the nature unintentionally. Consequently, paper producers should cut more trees and finally they destroy the environment, thus they are the fans of news without pictures because on this way fewer papers are being used. For gathering pictures or making clips, furthermore, producers need to spend more money and they think it is wasting the money and time, because news is just for listening during the day and do not need to allocate the budgets to them. Not only does showing the images or short movies about some sad news have a destructive direct effect on individuals’ feeling, but also it can increase the rate of harshness and crime among citizenry. For example, when they show the scene of war or battlefield or even arresting of criminals, people specially children see them and for them these activities are exciting enough and they want to imitate them in reality, so the rate of rudeness will rise in society.
At the conclusion, in my front of view, news without pictures are nothing, and images can illustrate the effect of news.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, furthermore, if, moreover, really, so, thus, while, at least, for example, for instance, in my opinion, 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: 17.0 7.85571142285 216% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 36.0 10.4138276553 346% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 24.0651302605 199% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 41.998997996 162% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2641.0 1615.20841683 164% => OK
No of words: 529.0 315.596192385 168% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99243856333 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79583152331 4.20363070211 114% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73181165974 2.80592935109 97% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 176.041082164 145% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.48393194707 0.561755894193 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 805.5 506.74238477 159% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.0452194414 49.4020404114 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.05 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.45 20.7667163134 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.1 7.06120827912 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229167924521 0.244688304435 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0813960932274 0.084324248473 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0291728150773 0.0667982634062 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156635367981 0.151304729494 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0418986158201 0.056905535591 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 50.2224549098 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.4159519038 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.58950901804 96% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 78.4519038076 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.