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.
Nowadays, despite the many disparities people have in a wide array of areas so far as one's opinion goes, one point that everybody agrees upon is the importance of being aware of the news. This is owing to the fact that news contributes to our daily activities and future decisions. That being said, even in this regard, different opinions might stir heated debates as to how we should opt between various news agencies. One particularly reoccurring idea brought up is that it is crucial to rely on news presented by different views. I personally find myself sympathetic to this notion. In what follows, the rationale for this thesis will be elaborated by focusing on 2 reasons.
First and foremost, it is easier to verify the authenticity of pieces of news when one collects the news from different sources. The news agencies are usually biased and rarely do they interpret an evident independently. Thus, in almost all the cases, either intentionally or unintentionally, they would mislead the audience by exaggerating some special aspects of a news. An example of what happened in Iran could aptly shed light on my claim. There are two major political parties in Iran: Reformists and Conservatives. More than 90% of news agencies such as newspapers, magazines, TV Channels, and news websites are financed by either conservatives or reformists. Last week, there was a rumor that the brother of the reformist president is accused of economic corruption. All the conservative agencies posted articles and interviews to prove his accusation while all the reformists were presenting documents to decline the claim. Having read the conservative's one reaches to the conclusion that president's brother is corrupted while by depending on the reformist's s/he would repudiate the claim. Then, In my opinion, only by relying on both sides which provide opposite points of views one could possibly hold an unbiased idea about what really happened.
Another equally important reason which deserves some words here is the fact that reading different views would enhance our information. Never does an agency could cover all the different aspects of a news. In today's sophisticated word, hardly could an event be explained based on one view. As a result, numerous experts should consider a news from different aspects and reveal their analysis to give us some insights about the real cause and possible outcomes of an event.By taking Global Warming as an instance I could aptly substantiate my point. Global Warming is of the heated issues that have become a matter of consideration for a wide variety of expertise e.g. sociology, law, ethics, politics, and economics to name but a few. Each of them might bring up a fact from their own perspective. For instance, a Law expert might consider international law treaties for controlling the problem, a development scientist might think that enforcing restrictive rules to control global warming could decrease the rate of industrialization, and so on. Thus, if one only follows the news from an agency whose experts are more inclined to consider legal aspects, s/he would neglect the other possible consideration. Otherwise, by searching through different sources their information would increase.
to recapitulate, all the reasons presented above bring us to the conclusion that it is better to read or watch the news which is presented by different views. This is due to reasons given, which are verification of news and enhancing one's information.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 87, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...have in a wide array of areas so far as ones opinion goes, one point that everybody ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 366, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'news'.
Suggestion: news
...by exaggerating some special aspects of a news. An example of what happened in Iran co...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 999, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'presidents'' or 'president's'?
Suggestion: presidents'; president's
...ives one reaches to the conclusion that presidents brother is corrupted while by depending...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1194, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...ch provide opposite points of views one could possibly hold an unbiased idea about what really...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 199, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'news'.
Suggestion: news
...ould cover all the different aspects of a news. In todays sophisticated word, hardly c...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 337, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'news'.
Suggestion: news
...esult, numerous experts should consider a news from different aspects and reveal their...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 473, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: By
...cause and possible outcomes of an event.By taking Global Warming as an instance I ...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: To
...es their information would increase. to recapitulate, all the reasons presented...
^^
Line 7, column 235, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
... are verification of news and enhancing ones information.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, e.g., first, if, really, so, then, thus, while, as to, for instance, such as, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 43.0788530466 88% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 52.1666666667 142% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2930.0 1977.66487455 148% => OK
No of words: 564.0 407.700716846 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19503546099 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87326216964 4.48103885553 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95683234258 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 305.0 212.727598566 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.540780141844 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 920.7 618.680645161 149% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.6003584229 131% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3014633897 48.9658058833 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.518518519 100.406767564 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8888888889 20.6045352989 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.03703703704 5.45110844103 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.5376344086 163% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.88709677419 184% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174367964775 0.236089414692 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0460530838447 0.076458572812 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0500015268636 0.0737576698707 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117605698988 0.150856017488 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0347036620422 0.0645574589148 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 11.7677419355 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 10.9000537634 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.01818996416 116% => OK
difficult_words: 168.0 86.8835125448 193% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
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.