In order to be well-informed, a person must get information from many different news resources.
As today world has been turning to an extremely complex environment, information resources play a paramount role in various aspects of human lifestyle, one of which is news outlets. There has been a controversial debate over the notion of whether people should rely on one or several varied news resources in order to be well-informed. I, personally, believe that it is better for people to get information from various sources than just one news source. My viewpoint is based on a few reasons, two compelling ones of which have been elaborated upon hereunder.
To begin with, feeding merely on one information source can prevent people to become an open-minded person, which means it prompts people inevitably follow a line of thought regardless of whether it is true or false. Indeed, accessing merely to one information sources can be a barrier in becoming active in cultural, political, science and social matters. It is hard to deny that there are some news outlets that undoubtedly depend on a political group and get financial support from one special bond. Under such a circumstance, they blindly publish information in favour of their sponsors and ignore to criticize and publish their political misbehaviour. When people have access to several news publicans, it can play a significant role in exposing corruption and in keeping politicians honest. For example, some online publicans recently published a piece of news revealing that the mayor of my hometown had taken bribes from a speculator four years ago. Although people eventually became aware of it thanks to these news sources, they did not know about it for a long time due to our national channel ignored to expose it. Had access to information limited only to the national channel, neither would people have been well-informed nor would the mayor has resigned. This example demonstrates how people can be well informed with information achieved by various news resources.
Secondly, another equally important reason which should be mentioned is that some information sources are not reliable and publish unqualified news. When a person gets information only from one news outlet, it may fall into mistake ways of learning and prevent in achieving a greater depth of information. My own experience demonstrates the danger of relying too heavily on one news source. Two years ago, I was assigned a research paper in a freshman history class. I cited data and information that I found on an online news resource which turned out to be completely incorrect. The information that I included in my paper was so hopelessly wrong that my professor spotted it immediately, causing me to fail the assignment and receive a fairly low grade in the class at end of the semester. Had I read other several news sites that have published information required me, I would not have included it and not have received such a bad score in the class.
In a nutshell, having considered all the aforementioned reasons, I firmly believe that people, in order to be well-informed, should get information from several varied news resources rather than merely one news source. Not only does it help people to become open-minded and politically active, but it also can decrease the possibility of accessing incorrect and wrong information.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, second, secondly, so, well, as to, for example, it is true, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.0286738351 154% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 43.0788530466 102% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 52.1666666667 130% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 8.0752688172 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2753.0 1977.66487455 139% => OK
No of words: 538.0 407.700716846 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11710037175 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81610080973 4.48103885553 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92539370067 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 278.0 212.727598566 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516728624535 0.524837075471 98% => OK
syllable_count: 880.2 618.680645161 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.3283675613 48.9658058833 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.136363636 100.406767564 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4545454545 20.6045352989 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.22727272727 5.45110844103 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => 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: 0.362673082602 0.236089414692 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116219330915 0.076458572812 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0918353232116 0.0737576698707 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253226822617 0.150856017488 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00802322833226 0.0645574589148 12% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 58.1214874552 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 10.9000537634 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.01818996416 112% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 86.8835125448 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => 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: 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.