It is more important to read or watch news presented by people whose views are different from your own than it is to read or watch news presented by those whose views are similar to your own.
With the increasingly diverse means of acquiring information, it has become a common phenonmen that we are exposed to conflicting ideas about a single event, which has aroused deep social concern. A growing boday of average people are wondering whether 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. From my pesepective, it is advisable to be a good listener to the different viewpoints.
Firstlly, receiving news presented by people with dissenting perspective can help people have access to the comprehensive information and get closer to the truth of the events. As is common sense, every single event or piece of news is not as simple as we expect. So it is an indisputable fact that nobody can have a panoramic view of the truth of the incidents due to the limited experience and knowledge span. In this case, gaining news from our opponents will definitely deliver a brandnew perspective and make us have a second thought of our own viewpoint. In other words, the clashes of different views will temper and refine our opinion about the events, with the result that a whole picture is formed. On the contrary, just selectively listening to the similar ideas, people will become narrow-minded.
Besides that, another potential benefit of obtaining news from those with opposite view is the higher likelihood to make acquaitance with more people. As is known to all, the way person responds to someone whose opinion differs drastically from theirs reveals their true character. To be specific, being tolerant of different voices about one thing reflects that a person is endowed with the quality of inclusiveness and humbility, which can make him/her leave a good impression on others. Consequently, no one, including those from opposing party, will refuse to become friends with humble and inclusive ones. Instead, those solely accepting same opinion are usually self-centered and arrogant so that they not consider others’ thought or feeling but impose their own opinion. Thus it is unlikely that they will build friendship with those with different ideas. Even worse, the alreadly established friendship may also end, once the disagreements occur.
In a nutshell, it is sensible for people to read or watch news from people with dissenting perspective, in order to gain the whole picture of the news and enlarge the social network.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 778, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...r feeling but impose their own opinion. Thus it is unlikely that they will build fri...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, consequently, first, if, may, second, so, thus, in other words, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 43.0788530466 79% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 52.1666666667 113% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2055.0 1977.66487455 104% => OK
No of words: 402.0 407.700716846 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11194029851 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47771567384 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79712735455 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539800995025 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 649.8 618.680645161 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.5499502925 48.9658058833 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.882352941 100.406767564 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6470588235 20.6045352989 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.82352941176 5.45110844103 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => 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: 0.361268750044 0.236089414692 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100441452039 0.076458572812 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.141154160858 0.0737576698707 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.24002414288 0.150856017488 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.119052050008 0.0645574589148 184% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 11.7677419355 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 10.9000537634 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 86.8835125448 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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.