The information revolution has changed the ways of mass communication and had some negative and positive effects on individuals’ lives as well as on society. To what extent you are agreed or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of information revolution and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of cutting edge communication is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that agreeing to adapt to the new telecommunication methods can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, modern communications technologies can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact the merits of speed of transmission, as well as cost beneficent communications, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I carried out an academic experiment which discovered improvement of life quality with respect to communication technologies. Hence, the beneficial ramifications of mass communication apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of individual wholesomeness, information revolution might increase the consequences of lack of privacy. Moreover, fundamental aspects of change in mass communication relate to this reality that the demerits of information leaking pertain to deteriorating human life. As a tangible example, some scientific experiment undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downsides of living in a social media addicted community correlate negatively with clinical depression. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of negative effects on individual life.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of modern information technologies far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of large scale communication prove the significance of technological advancements, but also pinpoint quality of individual life implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, well, while, as well as, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 20.9802955665 81% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 31.9359605911 135% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 5.75862068966 295% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1661.0 1207.87684729 138% => OK
No of words: 278.0 242.827586207 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.97482014388 5.00649968141 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.63594161461 2.71678728327 134% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 139.433497537 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.636690647482 0.580463131201 110% => OK
syllable_count: 539.1 379.143842365 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7097412115 50.4703680194 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.416666667 104.977214359 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1666666667 20.9669160288 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 7.25397266985 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229978372062 0.242375264174 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0735379136689 0.0925447433944 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0346829333205 0.071462118173 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118947378717 0.151781067708 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.061762187163 0.0609392437508 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 12.6369458128 145% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 22.75 53.1260098522 43% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 6.54236453202 223% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.64 11.5310837438 153% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.85 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 55.0591133005 194% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.