is it better to get news from sources with similar views to yours or from those with different views from yours
Whether an opposite view is regarded as challenging or bothersome depends on the lens through which one is looking. Also, an individual's attitude towards the news and its role in their lives depends to a great extent on ther personality characteristics. While many might believe that it is important to look at an event from every possible angle and search for the truth vigorously, opponents may claim that news is not an instrumental element in a person's daily life, and little effort should be made to obtain it. I agree with the latter, and I believe it is more reasonable to rely on those with similar views to mine when trying to attain news. I will demostrate further as follows.
First, although I believe looking at a particular subject from different persectives can be a challenge to human mind, and it can further increase a person's awareness, it cannot always be regarded as practical. In order to analyze the news from the perspective of people with different views from our own, we would probably get confused and question our own opinion. It is certainly a difficult path at the expense of one's own peace of mind. Thus, in my mind, obtaining the news from various sources that are not reliable to me, and whose views are not comparative to mine, is not worth the effort. For instance, I know the inflation in my country is out of control, and prices are incredibly high, but whenever I hear news delivered from opposing sources, I start to get anxious and doubt things that I was previously sure about.
Secondly, striving to find a reliable, trustworthy source of news with similar views to our own is diffucult enough. Adding to the challenge by repeating this process continously and attemping to assess the validity of news provided by different people, is simply too time-consuming to be practical. I believe that a person should devote little time and effort to getting the news, and it is best to focus on personal development rather than the circumstances present in the world around us. On that basis, the only function of news in my mind is for staying in the loop and having a slight idea of what is going around in the world, unless it seriously concerns me. Therefore, I see no need for expenditure of my resources like time and energy to obtain news from people whose beliefs are controversial to mine.
Conclusively, in my opinion, challenging one's self with different sources of information with opposing views can prove to be confusing, distressing, and a waste of resources. Hence, I believe people should rely on sources with similar views to their own.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 126, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
... through which one is looking. Also, an individuals attitude towards the news and its role ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 261, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun might seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much might', 'a good deal of might'.
Suggestion: much might; a good deal of might
...ther personality characteristics. While many might believe that it is important to look at...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 448, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a person' or simply 'persons'?
Suggestion: a person; persons
... news is not an instrumental element in a persons daily life, and little effort should be...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 150, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...man mind, and it can further increase a persons awareness, it cannot always be regarded...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, in my opinion, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 43.0788530466 104% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 52.1666666667 142% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2157.0 1977.66487455 109% => OK
No of words: 447.0 407.700716846 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.8255033557 4.8611393121 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59808378696 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80355421207 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 212.727598566 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534675615213 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 673.2 618.680645161 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => 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: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 20.1344086022 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 55.7640853775 48.9658058833 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.882352941 100.406767564 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2941176471 20.6045352989 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.76470588235 5.45110844103 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.363230812853 0.236089414692 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115444861322 0.076458572812 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0969585981048 0.0737576698707 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236516359405 0.150856017488 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0527651555523 0.0645574589148 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 11.7677419355 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.03 10.9000537634 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 86.8835125448 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.0537634409 123% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.