The widespread use of the internet has given people access to information on a level never experienced before. How does this increase in the availability of information influence life in today's world?
Invention of the internet, or more concretely, the World Wide Web, has affected human lives in tremendous ways. One of them is how easily can one access any kind of information nowadays. With that, however, come both positives and negatives, of which some of them I will address in the following paragraphs.
To begin with the upsides, thanks to the internet existing, people are able to follow, and be aware of vast amount of events and news all over the world on-demand. They don’t have to buy tabloids every morning, or watch newsflashes at a given time on the television. Instead, they can simply open the website of their favorite news magazine anywhere and anytime, as long as they have an internet connection. Therefore, having this kind of opportunities certainly encourages political activism and involvement of citizens in the public matters which is almost undoubtedly a good thing. For instance, in Slovakia, recent murder of an investigative journalist and his fiancée stirred up the biggest public protests since decades, with people demanding transparent and thorough investigation, government resignation and passing of strict anti-corruption and anti-mafia laws by the parliament.
In contrast, there are some downsides of widespread information availability as well. One of them, being unexpected growth of hoaxes and fake news spreading through the web. Large portions of internet users seem to fail to successfully distinguish actual facts and professional, sincere reporting from half-truths, propaganda or straight lies, which they encounter in the cyberspace. That may result into potentially harmful phenomena, such as current trend of parents refusing to vaccinate their children because of the belief that the vaccines do not work and cause autism, epilepsy and even death or recent rise of hatred towards various ethnical groups as a whole based on exaggerating of isolated, anecdotal events and various conspiracy theories. Those can be nonetheless, at least partially dealt with by encouraging critical thinking and importance of facts and science in both child and adult population.
To sum up, extensive expansion of using internet services among population comes as a mixed bag. Still, I believe that positives outweigh the negatives and the adverse effects of misinformation spreading over the web can be tackled rather effectively by the promotion of critical thinking and fact-checking in the educational process.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 249, Rule ID: ACTUAL_EXPERIENCE[1]
Message: Use simply 'facts'.
Suggestion: facts
...eem to fail to successfully distinguish actual facts and professional, sincere reporting fro...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 754, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this can' or 'Those cans'?
Suggestion: This can; Those cans
...events and various conspiracy theories. Those can be nonetheless, at least partially deal...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, may, nonetheless, so, still, therefore, well, at least, for instance, in contrast, kind of, such as, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 13.8261648746 166% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 43.0788530466 42% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 52.1666666667 117% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.0752688172 211% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2087.0 1977.66487455 106% => OK
No of words: 379.0 407.700716846 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.50659630607 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08045205169 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.646437994723 0.524837075471 123% => OK
syllable_count: 651.6 618.680645161 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6003584229 73% => 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: 25.0 20.1344086022 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 82.5266556265 48.9658058833 169% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.133333333 100.406767564 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2666666667 20.6045352989 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.93333333333 5.45110844103 164% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => 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: 0.12829886343 0.236089414692 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0445716960709 0.076458572812 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0527784430933 0.0737576698707 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0694897134738 0.150856017488 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0277918581119 0.0645574589148 43% => 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: 17.2 11.7677419355 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 58.1214874552 65% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.1575268817 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.97 10.9000537634 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.04 8.01818996416 125% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 86.8835125448 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.0537634409 119% => 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: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.