claim: The emergence of the online blogosphere and social media 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 discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
The claim states that the emergence of social media has debased the quality of political discourse in the United States. This claim is based on the fact that even the least informed citizen can publish political opinions now, and thus, the overall quality of information will decline. I agree with this claim because of two supporting evidences to the reason stated.First of all, since social media is accessible to everyone, even the people who do not know anything about politics can claim themselves as experts in the field and start stating an opinion that is in no case informed. For example, a person who does not understand the principles of economics can easily publish a post discussing the shortcomings of a political decision concerning the country's economy. However, the lack of knowledge that the teenager posesses will ultimately lead to a debased and most likely unfounded opinion, making it unvalid and lowering the overall quality of political discourse. Secondly, the role of social media in politics has become increasingly important, but unfortunately not for the intended reasons. Social media influencers now can change the outcome of a political decision or an election because of their fanbase. For example, if a greatly admired person, such as a famous actor or a sportsman supports a political cabndidate, there are high chances that the people who commendate him will vote for that same candidate, solely based on the their favorite superstar's opinion. This impedes people to get interested by actual political issues and opinions, and make them rely instead on the opinion of superstars. Again, this evidence supports the claim and leads to the absence of criticism in political views. Nevertheless, the claim contains a major flaw. It does not laud the fact that the access to social media is allowing the United States to escape the narrow view of what official media conveys, and instead gives an opportunity for frequent and more complex political discussions. Social media lets people from different backgrounds, jobs, views, interact with each other and discuss actual issues. Indeed, a political debate only composed of politicians will most likely be different than a political debate composed of artists, sportsmen, CEOs, etc. Debates on the internet can actually convey a broader vision than classical political discourse. However, it is important to bear in mind that these discussions on the internet should be taken with a grain of salt, and used to supplement a political idea from experts. With the rise of social media, the quality of political discourse in the United States is set to decline. Even with the diversity of opinions that one can collect from the internet, the fact that the information provided by experts in the field and average citizens is regarded as the same constitutes a major flaw in the quality of political topics found online.
| 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 |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 367, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: First
...pporting evidences to the reason stated.First of all, since social media is accessibl...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 1442, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'their'?
Suggestion: the; their
...or that same candidate, solely based on the their favorite superstars opinion. This imped...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 2198, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...liticians will most likely be different than a political debate composed of artists,...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, thus, for example, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2426.0 2235.4752809 109% => OK
No of words: 471.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15074309979 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65859790218 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75013886541 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 215.323595506 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.498938428875 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 785.7 704.065955056 112% => 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: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.5230851789 60.3974514979 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.777777778 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1666666667 23.4991977007 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.16666666667 5.21951772744 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 1.0 4.97078651685 20% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.433882144442 0.243740707755 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.154678894163 0.0831039109588 186% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0915964743347 0.0758088955206 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.433882144442 0.150359130593 289% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0667264976115 0% => 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: 15.9 14.1392134831 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.8420337079 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 100.480337079 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 11.8971910112 155% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
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.