Claim: The emergence of the online "blogosphere" has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States.
Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political topics will inevitably decline.
Write a response in which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
I agree with the reasoning that while anyone can publish political opinions online, there is no quality or fact checking that can be done, which might lead to low quality standards. But to directly claim that online blogging has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States is a little too extreme. With the emergence of online blogging, many people whose voices and thoughts were previously unheard or wasn't able to reach the right audience is now accessible by most of the population. As politics has always been a sensitive topic, people were sceptical about voicing their thoughts openly. They feel much more comfortable now posting these online as this can be done anonymously. This has allowed the audience to gauge views which were previously inaccessible to them.
Adding to this point, previously, newspapers with expensive subscription such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, US Daily etcetera. were inaccessible to the population who could not afford these, but now many of these popular newspapers publish free articles online which can be accessed by almost everyone. This has led to increased reach and spreading of knowledge about current events to almost all parts of the population in United States.
Another important point to consider is that politicians are known to have a significant influence and control over print media and popular newspapers, which might lead to actual events being concealed deliberately and being replaced with false ones. On an online platform, this control is weakened and almost non-existent as the people can freely voice their opinions and report true events, which increases the legitimation of the content. As many of these articles are written by ordinary people in society, people are able to connect to their views and understand them better.
While ease of access might lead to more uninformed opinions being published, the emergence of the blogosphere has encouraged people to actively participate in discussions regarding political events rather than just consuming or reading about news which is published in papers. Hence it is invalid to make a direct claim that emergence of online blogosphere public discourse.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-11 | YASSINETURKI | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-04 | Technoblade | 66 | view |
| 2022-12-18 | p_keerthika | 50 | view |
| 2022-07-24 | afroza2 | 83 | view |
| 2022-07-24 | afroza2 | 83 | view |
- Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news During the same time period most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with th 68
- A recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that employees with paid sick leave are 28 less likely to be involved in a work related accident than employees who do not receive payment for sick leave Researchers hypothesize that e 59
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and supporting you 50
- Claim The emergence of the online blogosphere has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States Reason When anyone can publish political opinions easily standards for covering news and political topics will inevitably decl 50
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 57
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 438, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...and thoughts were previously unheard or wasnt able to reach the right audience is now...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 142, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Were
...The Washington Post, US Daily etcetera. were inaccessible to the population who coul...
^^^^
Line 7, column 278, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...bout news which is published in papers. Hence it is invalid to make a direct claim th...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, regarding, so, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1876.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 352.0 442.535393258 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32954545455 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33147354134 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76259675983 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.551136363636 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 593.1 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.0231862073 60.3974514979 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.0 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1428571429 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.21428571429 5.21951772744 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244394434657 0.243740707755 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0886966735826 0.0831039109588 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0991435451275 0.0758088955206 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145708331459 0.150359130593 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102928551865 0.0667264976115 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 100.480337079 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.