It is hard to deny that celebrities have given up their privacy to become famous, which leads impressionable people to conclude that entertainers and athletes do not deserve more privacy than they have now. However, such a statement suffers from both logical and factual fallacies, and it should be examined meticulously. As far as equality, empathy, and necessity are concerned, I firmly hold the view that entertainers and athletes need privacy.
First and foremost, all people are entitled to privacy equally, as privacy allows us to mitigate our social environment and our inner world. Meanwhile, a person cannot reflect or grow without freedom from the scrutiny of others. Not to mention that this age of social media and cyber-surveillance has brought essential questions surrounding privacy to the fore. We ask what kind of information and data governance and businesses are entitled to spy on our online history, but these same considerations are pushed aside in the case of celebrities, whom society somewhat arbitrarily deems unworthy for privacy at all.
Furthermore, when we try perspective-taking, the fact that we realize the smallest thing in an average person'sperson's life becomes news in a celebrity'scelebrity's life indicates that people should show empathy to those entertainers and athletes'athletes' privacy has been violated. Take the case of celebrities, who are under constant scrutiny. If their dress was too low-cut, if they get a pimple or start seeing someone new, everyone knows about it. In most people'speople's cases, they can live their lives without fear of being judged by the public, but not celebrities. Every move they make has to be calculated in order not to upset others. Had it not been for respect for entertainers and athletes'athletes' privacy, we would probably become cold-blooded people without empathy.
Nevertheless, a voice arises that privacy is the necessary price of fame, and it is ridiculous for celebrities to require more privacy because it is their own choice to give up privacy to become famous. Ironically, fame does not necessitate a loss of privacy. There are, in fact, plenty of famous people, including entertainers and athletes, whose private lives are not routinely invaded by the media. We never saw an article making fun of Yao Ming's affair. Even Hollywood leading stars like Matt Damon and Julia Roberts have managed to avoid the gossip mill. These cases of famous people whose lives are, for the most part, private prove that fame can be based on achievement rather than intrigue, and all celebrities should be treated this way. Therefore, since the vital link between losing privacy and earning fame is totally a misconception, their privacy rights should be respected.
In a nutshell, I maintain that well-known entertainers and athletes deserve to have more privacy than they have now. Admittedly, as my favorite quote from Penelope Fitzgerald goes, it is interesting to note everyone has a different take on the world, a different opinion, and given the same inputs have completely different outputs, and some people may oppose me. However, I believe they will compromise after being exposed to my article.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, therefore, well, while, as to, in fact, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 15.1003584229 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 13.8261648746 174% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 43.0788530466 109% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2678.0 1977.66487455 135% => OK
No of words: 509.0 407.700716846 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26129666012 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74984508646 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07921164941 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 289.0 212.727598566 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.567779960707 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 870.3 618.680645161 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.86738351254 428% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.5774680577 48.9658058833 128% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.434782609 100.406767564 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1304347826 20.6045352989 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.69565217391 5.45110844103 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229164726582 0.236089414692 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.064203083279 0.076458572812 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10487359748 0.0737576698707 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145851972845 0.150856017488 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0999685257373 0.0645574589148 155% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 11.7677419355 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 86.8835125448 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.