Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
It is important to read or watch news presented by people with different views than people by similar views.
In the today's media era, every single person should be exactly familiar with the way reporters and the media, on the whole, work. While quite a few people usually trust and follow only one source for finding out news, I personally believe that one source broadcasting news based on a defined set of policies is neither enough nor reliable. The reasons for my opinion will be elaborated in the following paragraphs.
To begin with, everyone has this experience in their lives that different people describe the same story or event distinctively because each person has his or her own especial look to the world. In comparison between an artist or a philosopher, For example, if they explained the theme of Caligula, a play by Alber Camo, the artist would bring up its easthetistical views and may find it a pleasent play while the philosopher would arise the philosophy of life and the Camo' viewpoint about death. Due to this undoubted fact, trusting to a person or a spesific source would only inform the audiences of one perspective of an event, while in the complicated modern's life, every news and happening has a great number of facets worth to follow.
Additionally, as in a brief way mentioned in the introduction, every news agency and channel pursue some especial policies based on which they has been shaped. Some have even an owner, and it means they should follow their owner's desires. Therefore, it would not an exaggeration if we told that every source broadcasts an event in a biased way, and there is approximately no objective news channel nowadays. Take wikieleaks, many are of the opinion that it is nonprofit, unbiased, and indifferent in broadcasting news, some other, on the other hand, believe that why it has not published any documents of Russia or China, why only the United States. In other words, if we were interested in the whole story of an event, we should follow most of the biased news agancies, then with our deduction ability , complete the event's puzzle to reach to the very truth of an event.
In conclusion, with all this taken into account, not only is not there just a window to an event, but those windows are not apathetic as well. Seeking to discover the truth, people should consider various views to obtain all facts about an issue and to establish the truth connected to the reality based on them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 199, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: comparison,
... her own especial look to the world. In comparison between an artist or a philosopher, For...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 657, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'moderns'' or 'modern's'?
Suggestion: moderns'; modern's
...e of an event, while in the complicated moderns life, every news and happening has a gr...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 18, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a brief way" with adverb for "brief"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ets worth to follow. Additionally, as in a brief way mentioned in the introduction, every ne...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 144, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
...e especial policies based on which they has been shaped. Some have even an owner, a...
^^^
Line 3, column 329, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a biased way" with adverb for "biased"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...d that every source broadcasts an event in a biased way, and there is approximately no objectiv...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 803, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...gancies, then with our deduction ability , complete the events puzzle to reach to ...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'well', 'while', 'for example', 'in conclusion', 'in other words', 'on the whole', 'to begin with', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.235555555556 0.229887763892 102% => OK
Verbs: 0.128888888889 0.158761421928 81% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0733333333333 0.0866891130778 85% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0533333333333 0.046263068375 115% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0444444444444 0.0685040099705 65% => OK
Prepositions: 0.117777777778 0.118717715034 99% => OK
Participles: 0.0377777777778 0.0351676179071 107% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.64983080414 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0266666666667 0.0309702414327 86% => OK
Particles: 0.00444444444444 0.00188951952338 235% => OK
Determiners: 0.137777777778 0.0887237588012 155% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0222222222222 0.0209618222197 106% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00666666666667 0.0139019557991 48% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2348.0 2387.08602151 98% => OK
No of words: 406.0 408.028673835 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.78325123153 5.86048508987 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.48200974243 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.330049261084 0.338922669872 97% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.209359605911 0.251872472559 83% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.152709359606 0.174417080927 88% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.113300492611 0.112833075102 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64983080414 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 212.727598566 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551724137931 0.524397521467 105% => OK
Word variations: 63.6181891797 59.2087087015 107% => OK
How many sentences: 13.0 20.6684587814 63% => OK
Sentence length: 31.2307692308 20.5533526081 152% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.8855445709 48.84282405 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 180.615384615 120.699889404 150% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.2307692308 20.5533526081 152% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.15384615385 0.644075263715 179% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.5376344086 88% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.54480286738 108% => OK
Readability: 52.1667298219 45.7405998639 114% => OK
Elegance: 1.72549019608 1.45489161554 119% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.224721583141 0.300154397459 75% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.106300423481 0.103427244359 103% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0532964089116 0.0752933317313 71% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.569561780831 0.497263757937 115% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.111707838011 0.151897553556 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0936880146855 0.114077575197 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0494712885536 0.0781384742642 63% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.359995519611 0.336927656856 107% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0646785043154 0.067059652881 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157289867282 0.210909579961 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0384610229606 0.0618886996521 62% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8870967742 50% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.86379928315 52% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.91756272401 102% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 8.42114695341 59% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 2.4623655914 81% => OK
Neutral topic words: 5.0 2.75985663082 181% => OK
Total topic words: 12.0 13.6433691756 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.