It is more important to read and watch news presented by people whose opinion is different from your own view than by people whose opinion are similar to yours.
A controversial issue relating to whether people should read or watch news presented by individuals whose opinions are diverse or similar from your own has been brought to the attention of the public. Relevant authorities are urged that adults should accept more views that are totally different from themselves. From a personal point of view, the above statement is agreeable for some reasons as below.
To begin with, humans would consider an issue in a more comprehensive way if they could comprehend various thoughts from others. To be more specific, there are a number of perspectives that would be released by some famous expertise or leaders. All of these ideas are fascinating and insightful even if they are entirely diverse from people own. In this case, it would be a beneficial approach for people to realize those valuable standpoints and it would offer individuals an unusual aspect to consider a matter instead of only measuring a problem from the same point. On the contrary, if adults merely consult news published by someone whose concepts are the same as their own, their knowledge and horizons are gradually limited since they barely receive fresh viewpoints. Moreover, people could be easier to generate prejudices of some thoughts that are opposite to themselves. Therefore, adopting a variety of concepts from well-known specialists would cultivate a all-sided and rational ability for mankind.
What is more, receiving all kinds of standpoints from a different person would foster a more broad-minded approach to the world. If people could not only contain similar thoughts from their own but also obtain adverse ideas from other citizens, they are better able to understand other residents' way of thinking and characteristics. In this case, they would treat everyone in a more friendly and inclusive manner and possess a more open attitude to the world. For example, when I do one project, I prefer to do the urgent part firstly and then do what I like. However, many fellows are accustomed to work at the section that their favorite firstly and left the imperative segment does next. When we exchange our ideas about this habit, I could completely comprehend every custom since everybody has a personal standpoint to their usual practice.
Finally, acquiring same concepts all the time would not give any advantageous to someone's accomplishment. If individuals reject to gain some advanced views that diverse from their own, the knowledge they acquired would not sustain their continued success. From what was discussed above, people should not always obtain similar thoughts and refuse receiving progressive concepts.
To sum up, from what has been discussed above, it is rewarding for humans to absorb or watch news announced by people whose point of views are disparate from their own because they would possess a more general way to think about one issue and more understand other companions around them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 967, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... well-known specialists would cultivate a all-sided and rational ability for mank...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, for example, on the contrary, to begin with, to sum up, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 15.1003584229 146% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 43.0788530466 91% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 52.1666666667 127% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2464.0 1977.66487455 125% => OK
No of words: 475.0 407.700716846 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18736842105 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66845742379 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73503097968 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 212.727598566 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505263157895 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 771.3 618.680645161 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.4008680481 48.9658058833 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.2 100.406767564 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 20.6045352989 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.7 5.45110844103 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
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: 0.294619594156 0.236089414692 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0870629555773 0.076458572812 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100739620413 0.0737576698707 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196276142311 0.150856017488 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.118816597336 0.0645574589148 184% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 10.9000537634 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.01818996416 109% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 86.8835125448 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.