It is important to read or watch the news presented by people whose views are different from your own or presented by people whose views are similar to your own. Which one do you agree?
In today's modern and sophisticated world, there is a tremendous amount of point of views which are different from each other. In this connection, having different ideas is visible in who presents the news. Although contested by many that the matter of hearing the news from who has different notions from audiences is beneficial, such an issue is regarded as both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I concur with the opinion that people should listen to the news from who disagrees with them, and I will analyze my reasons throughout this essay.
Firstly, when people understand opposing ideas by reading the news that is written by those who believe differently from them, they have an ideal opportunity to correct their wrong beliefs. To be more specific, sometimes people support opinions because they do not have exact information about its negative sides; otherwise, they decide cleverly. According to my own experience, when a government decision to build a wall in a salty lake, I agreed with them, so much so that I paid extra taxes to help this project financially. After I watched the news which its speaker rejected the government's idea, I have realized that my decision to approve building the wall was incorrect. According to the data, the lake is in an active region, so frequent earthquakes will destroy it. Hence, I have not paid extra taxes to help the wall construction as I have comprehended my faults.
Secondly, people can increase their argumentation's ability by watching the news that is reported information, which has a conflict with theirs. To elucidate, when people understand contrasting ideas, they make an effort to prove their views by either surfing net or studying books broadening their horizons. Hence, they learn how to defend their sides. For example, last week, I watched the documentary which discusses the impossibilities of a human's trip to Mars. According to the program, the distance is so far, so cargo does not have enough space to carry food. I have thought that it is not convincing; hence, I searched to provide evidence. By doing so, I have grasped that we can cultivate the plants which are in water and save space. Therefore, by cropping them, travelers have enough food, so it helps me to insist on my opinion. Today, when we discussed whether it is practical to travel to Mars or not, I convinced the opposite students wonderfully based on my considerable amount of information.
To conclude, while there are several arguments on each side, I profoundly believe that it is useful to be aware of opposite views. Not only does knowing others' facets of view help one to decide wisely, but it also teaches people to support their thoughts firmly.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 585, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...the news which its speaker rejected the governments idea, I have realized that my decision ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 264, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eople to support their thoughts firmly.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 9.8082437276 51% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 13.8261648746 51% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 22.0 11.0286738351 199% => OK
Pronoun: 60.0 43.0788530466 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 62.0 52.1666666667 119% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2279.0 1977.66487455 115% => OK
No of words: 457.0 407.700716846 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98687089716 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62358717085 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81341387912 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 212.727598566 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.54704595186 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 709.2 618.680645161 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 9.59856630824 146% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.9604608186 48.9658058833 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.523809524 100.406767564 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7619047619 20.6045352989 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.2380952381 5.45110844103 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189335639429 0.236089414692 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0533113458837 0.076458572812 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0483285360764 0.0737576698707 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115636155134 0.150856017488 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0393372489171 0.0645574589148 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 10.9000537634 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.01818996416 110% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 86.8835125448 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => 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: 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.