People prefer to communicate through social media and internet rather than face-to-face meetings. Is this positive or negative?
Nowadays, communication through social media and the World Wide Web have been preferred by some people rather than direct meetings. I disagree with that; it harms our life. This essay shows the disadvantages of communicating through the internet and phone applications and their effect on societal norms.
Firstly, dealings with others by using Social networking programs such as Facebook and WhatsApp are slowly killing activism and replacing it with slacktivism. Moreover, it creates a great gap between family members. In addition to, media sharing has encouraged the public to use computers and mobile phones to express their concerns on social issues without actually having to engage actively with others in real life, which is against societal norms. For instance, research from a societal magazine in 2019 showed that the crack among family members was increasing by 30% from 2017 to 2018. As almost a quarter the world’s population is now on Facebook.
Secondly, the rise of using internet communicating applications around the globe hurts interpersonal communication skills. People are depending on indirect communications with others they have low personal communications skills. For example, in 2018, a study has been published by the New York Times newspaper reported that communication skills of people who are using interpersonal communications have a high level of communication skills rather than who depend on indirect communication during social media network.
In conclusion, the power of social media and the internet have shifted the balance from the hands of a few to the masses. Therefore, communications through their effect on our social and ethical behaviour. I believe that Face- to- Face meetings are still the most effective way to communicate with others.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 131, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...erpersonal communication skills. People are depending on indirect communications with others ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 453, Rule ID: IN_WHO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'whom'?
Suggestion: whom
...vel of communication skills rather than who depend on indirect communication during...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, firstly, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 7.85571142285 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1534.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 276.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.55797101449 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03297661959 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.590579710145 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 463.5 506.74238477 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.4738912511 49.4020404114 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.571428571 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7142857143 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1428571429 7.06120827912 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
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: 0.33718017783 0.244688304435 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105794281829 0.084324248473 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100701017327 0.0667982634062 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.217454799175 0.151304729494 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.113369719171 0.056905535591 199% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.97 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 78.4519038076 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.