The lazy journalism has become commonplace in today's digitalized world. Explain what is it and the cause of it. How do you define "lazy" journalism and what is the cause?
Recently, the phenomenon of "the lazy journalism has become commonplace in today's digitalized world" and its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debating the proposition that the traditional journalism might be remarkably fruitful, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a remarkable number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the lazy journalism can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the digitalized world standpoint, the lazy journalism can provide the society with profound effects, which might stem from the fact that the benefits of modern technologies and new methods of journalism are inextricably bound up. Regarding my personal experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the definition of the lazy journalism. Thus, invaluable ramifications of both online newspapers and online magazines distinctly can be observed.
Within the realm of science, without the slightest doubt, the cause of the lazy journalism might exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of the fake news. Moreover, fundamental aspects of the modern journalism can relate to the reality that the demerits of the expansion of the Internet can pertain to being a reporter. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that if the downsides of gathering news from online materials were correlated positively with the conventional journalism, the local authorities would ultimately address the assessment of news accuracy. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the preconceived notion of becoming commonplace in the modern society.
To conclude, despite several compelling arguments on both sides, I opt to vigorously support the idea that the merits of the lazy journalism far outweigh its downsides.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 153, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...nd its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, moreover, regarding, so, thus, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 6.10837438424 164% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 31.9359605911 119% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1634.0 1207.87684729 135% => OK
No of words: 284.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.75352112676 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27943009888 2.71678728327 121% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 139.433497537 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.609154929577 0.580463131201 105% => OK
syllable_count: 519.3 379.143842365 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 5.0 1.56157635468 320% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.1315720852 50.4703680194 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.545454545 104.977214359 142% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8181818182 20.9669160288 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.45454545455 7.25397266985 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 6.9802955665 57% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => 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: 0.265649852537 0.242375264174 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0947601003432 0.0925447433944 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0747160130185 0.071462118173 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15130090653 0.151781067708 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0449055022695 0.0609392437508 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.6 12.6369458128 147% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 53.1260098522 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.37 11.5310837438 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.77 8.32886699507 129% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 55.0591133005 193% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => 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.