Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
In a democratic society, there are several ways to reveal problems to the public and evoke the following reforms of the problems. Therefore, I do believe there are more much better ways to deal with public issues than using scandals, which normally cause more harm than benefit. However, I will discuss further and illustrate to what extent, scandals may play a relatively positive role.
First, the qualities of scandals matter, which means the essentiality and reality of information revealed from the scandals do affect the function of scandals. For example, if a true fact about one scandal relating to certain governor’s bribe during the election period is released, then the function of this scandal is positive, since it made the illegal behaviors known and help the public to make a better judgement of the candidate. On the other hand, if the scandal about the same bribe is untrue, then the harm to the governor can be created, since he/she will suffer from the negative image. Hence, scandals have two-sides effects, and the positive side only happens when the scandal speaks of the truth.
Second, scandals tend to bring lots of attention because of the way it presents usually including dramas that are eye-catching. Thus, scandals may elicit following investigations. For instance, US president Donald Trump was accused for his illegal collaboration with Russian government to win the presidential election. Further investigations were conducted and also led to a vote to suspend Donald Trump’s presidential position. Though the result is that Donald Trump is not guilty, numerous resources have already been put into the investigation as well as the vote arrangement, which may be a waste of public resources. Therefore, it is beneficial that the scandals do lead public attention to certain critical problems, but it may also create waste of public resources if the scandal is untrue.
In conclusion, I argue that the positive effects, leading public attention to critical problems, which scandals bring is only valid when the scandals are true and authentic. Otherwise, the way scandals present tends to create harm and waste of public resources. Hence, I do believe there are other ways in democratic society playing better role in waking people’s attention to important issues, such as open discussion and regular votes to replace inappropriate governors.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-12-29 | divijadivz | 60 | view |
| 2022-08-23 | ajay@123 | 66 | view |
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 66
- The following appeared in a letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University A study conducted at nearby Oceania University showed that faculty retention is higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university for thei 53
- The main benefit of the study of history is to dispel the illusion that people living now are significantly different from people who lived in earlier times Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement 79
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your posi 70
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your posi 50
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, then, therefore, thus, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 58.6224719101 73% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2012.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 380.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29473684211 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82317771491 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 215.323595506 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.526315789474 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 621.9 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7516606014 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.75 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.25 5.21951772744 196% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176360889681 0.243740707755 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0643199685949 0.0831039109588 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0461766081271 0.0758088955206 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113711449761 0.150359130593 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0186493882356 0.0667264976115 28% => 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: 15.4 14.1392134831 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 100.480337079 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, then, therefore, thus, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 58.6224719101 73% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2012.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 380.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29473684211 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82317771491 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 215.323595506 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.526315789474 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 621.9 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7516606014 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.75 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.25 5.21951772744 196% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176360889681 0.243740707755 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0643199685949 0.0831039109588 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0461766081271 0.0758088955206 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113711449761 0.150359130593 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0186493882356 0.0667264976115 28% => 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: 15.4 14.1392134831 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 100.480337079 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.