Some people say that having a lot of TV channels is good, while others argue that it reduces the quality of programs. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Television is dominating as the best source of amusement in this high-tech era. Presently, some people assert that the availability of a wide range of channels is lucrative to entertain and keep people updated with every sector of life for the betterment. By contrast, the quality of programs has to undergo inferiority. Here, I would like to account for both sides with my own perception.
There are manifold points to support the former view. First and foremost, the presence of a large number of channels serves everyone with their desired programs. For example, children and young people are fond of watching cartoons, action movies, reality shows, educational, sports and cooking programs respectively. Where as adults and grey generation have tendency to watch the news and the religious, political and cultural programs. Hence, an umpteen channels comprising abundance of programs are essential to satisfy the needs and wishes of people. Besides this, people do not get bored while watching the television under the presence of various programs. On the contrary, others have conflicting arguments.
They think that a massive number of channels has adverse effect on the superiority of programs. To be specific, there is a stiff competition among channel broadcasters to gain widespread prevalence. As a result, they not only exaggerate the programs by adding spice but also manipulate to make them more entertaining. Thus, the originality of programs is being defaced by the telecasting authorities. All of above, every channel wants to introduce something different than other but, in fact, most of the channels fail to show the quality in their programs.
From my notion, both aspects have their own significance. The excessive number of channels may have some negative impacts on superiority of the programs. However, the existence of channels in an enormous numbers plays a terrific role to contend people from top to bottom.
To recapitulate, the extraordinary services of television deserve a huge appreciation. The Media broadcasters must think about inserting more purity and originality to get the best outcome of channels.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...for both sides with my own perception. There are manifold points to support the...
^^^
Line 3, column 91, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...ew. First and foremost, the presence of a large number of channels serves everyone with their des...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 318, Rule ID: WHERE_AS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Whereas'?
Suggestion: Whereas
...orts and cooking programs respectively. Where as adults and grey generation have tendenc...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 456, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'channel'?
Suggestion: channel
...nd cultural programs. Hence, an umpteen channels comprising abundance of programs are es...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 469, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
... wants to introduce something different than other but, in fact, most of the channel...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, hence, however, if, may, so, thus, while, as to, for example, in fact, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1820.0 1615.20841683 113% => OK
No of words: 336.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41666666667 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28139028586 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98066330562 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583333333333 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 574.2 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.0830741606 49.4020404114 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.6666666667 106.682146367 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.0 20.7667163134 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06120827912 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.67935871743 184% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.237530478759 0.244688304435 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0620326496697 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0483478468175 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115636522033 0.151304729494 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0630867814219 0.056905535591 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 50.2224549098 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.86 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.