The use of mobile phone is as antisocial as smoking. Smoking is banned in certain places and so mobile phones should also be banned.
To what extent do you agree or disagee?
Although smoking and the nuisance of mobile phones are both antisocial activities, I disagree with a ban on
cell phones. I believe that smoking does not have any good side to it and therefore, its ban is justified,
whereas the cell phone has its own set of advantages and so should not be banned.
To begin with, smoking causes harm to the smoker as well as the non-smoker who is in the propinquity of
the smoker. Studies have proven that the passive smoker is even more at risk of lung cancer than the active
smoker. This is because he inhales the second-hand smoke, emitted by the smoker. Similarly, in public
places, the cell phone can distract other people and divert their attention. For instance, in libraries, people
can be easily distracted through ringtones of incoming calls or people talking over the phone loudly with
their loved ones. Even in public places like hospitals, cell phones can easily interfere with the medical
equipment and also irritate the patients waiting to see the doctor. Moreover, its usage in religious places
can spoil the peace of those paying obeisance.
However, despite all the abuses of cell phones, one cannot deny the uses of mobiles. They are one's easily
available help in case of an emergency. They also keep loved and near ones well connected. No matter
where one goes, cell phones are the only hope of keeping families connected without any hassle' The SMS
is also a convenient way to keep in touch with your loved ones when no one has the time for writing long
letters. Mobiles are also a great source of entertainment. You can listen to songs, play games, get live
cricket scores, market-updates and even the headlines. They are convenient, easily accessible and of great
use.
Moreover, these modern devices are very important in this commercial and financial society. Therefore,
the total banning of pagers and mobile phones in public places is not practical. lt will cause inconvenience
and the people would not be able to catch up with the modern trend of communication. Cellphones have
become vital tools in today's world and blocking them in public places will result in a gross violation of
personal freedom.
To sum up, mobiles were invented for our convenience and not to create nuisance. lf used judiciously,
wisely and with public etiquette, mobiles can be of great use. Comparing the cell phone to smoking and
banning the cell phone would not be practical.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-09-20 | Dhruv Singh | 61 | view |
| 2021-09-20 | Dhruv Singh | 73 | view |
- As well as making money business also have social responsibility to what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Many people are now opting to provide technology companies with their personal data in exchange for access to software Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages 89
- As well as making money business also have social responsibility to what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- As well as making money business also have social responsibility to what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- The use of mobile phone is as antisocial as smoking Smoking is banned in certain places and so mobile phones should also be banned To what extent do you agree or disagee 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 20, column 82, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Lt
...ones in public places is not practical. lt will cause inconvenience and the peopl...
^^
Line 24, column 81, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Lf
...convenience and not to create nuisance. lf used judiciously, wisely and with publ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, moreover, second, similarly, so, therefore, well, whereas, for instance, as well as, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 41.998997996 133% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2054.0 1615.20841683 127% => OK
No of words: 411.0 315.596192385 130% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99756690998 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50256981431 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57615865916 2.80592935109 92% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 176.041082164 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554744525547 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 640.8 506.74238477 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 5.43587174349 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 16.0721442886 143% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.6586220362 49.4020404114 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.3043478261 106.682146367 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8695652174 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5652173913 7.06120827912 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 24.0 4.38176352705 548% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304998320998 0.244688304435 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0869706274435 0.084324248473 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0924683831963 0.0667982634062 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0865882722271 0.151304729494 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0906254111848 0.056905535591 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.0946893788 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.42 12.4159519038 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 78.4519038076 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.