Television Good or Bad
Recently, the phenomenon of watching television and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the significance is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial namber of individuals. I am inclined to believe that public awarness can be a plus and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, spreading news can provide the society with some noticeable effects which discovered the fact that entertainment, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered bad habit. Thus, beneficail ramifications of both networks society and advertisment effect apparently can be seen.
Whithin the realm of public arena, developing it skills might increase the consequences of lisear time . As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by prestigious university has asserted that the downside of making movie is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived the notion of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly belive that the benefits of TV far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of public relations prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issue's potential implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 303, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...I performed an academic experiment which discovered bad habit. Thus, beneficail r...
^^
Line 3, column 103, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...increase the consequences of lisear time . As a tangible example, some scientific ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
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 : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 31.9359605911 72% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1277.0 1207.87684729 106% => OK
No of words: 223.0 242.827586207 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.7264573991 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86434787811 3.92707691288 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30800559076 2.71678728327 122% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 139.433497537 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.708520179372 0.580463131201 122% => OK
syllable_count: 409.5 379.143842365 108% => 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: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.65517241379 82% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.6447114527 50.4703680194 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.090909091 104.977214359 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2727272727 20.9669160288 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.36363636364 7.25397266985 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => 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: 0.0499683305296 0.242375264174 21% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0163512254721 0.0925447433944 18% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0348851106083 0.071462118173 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.022924598093 0.151781067708 15% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0231343007621 0.0609392437508 38% => 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: 15.7 12.6369458128 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 53.1260098522 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 10.9458128079 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.95 11.5310837438 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.21 8.32886699507 135% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 55.0591133005 169% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.94827586207 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.1111111111 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 10.0 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.