social media
Through the reading and the lecture there are many negative consequences of social media presented. Both give many examples to help support the same idea.
First they mention that social media destroys relationships. In both the reading and the lecture they show that people have begun to put more value on computer based relationships rather than real life ones. They frame this idea as people losing touch with the real world and losing genuine relationships.
Next, they both propose that another negative consequence of social media is cyber-bullying. This is when someone uses the internet to tease or harass someone, oftentimes anonymously. The lecture talks about how this is dangerous because people are willing to say things they wouldn’t say in public and they think that there are no consequences of doing so.
Finally, the reading and lecture take a look at productivity. They both use examples to show how social media is a huge distraction for people. Instead of doing work or homework, people use social media to distract them from their obligations. The lecture suggests that this has cost some businesses billions of dollars in lost revenue.
In conclusion, the reading and lecture use a wide variety of examples to support their thoughts that social media is a bad thing. The many negatives of social media are almost overwhelming.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, if, look, so, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1145.0 1373.03311258 83% => OK
No of words: 221.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18099547511 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85565412703 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74382066314 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.547511312217 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 351.9 419.366225166 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.582369038 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.7857142857 110.228320801 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.7857142857 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.07142857143 7.06452816374 43% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.363432107716 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.171839507731 0.0996497079465 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.176980350475 0.0662205650399 267% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.250913077713 0.162205337803 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.115124399527 0.0443174109184 260% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.52 8.42419426049 89% => OK
difficult_words: 44.0 63.6247240618 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.5 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.