In today's modern living, arguments about whether because of media scrutiny, it is impossible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero or not. While some people contend the former, others believe otherwise. In my opinion, although both opinions might have plausible reasons, without a doubt, I would settle upon the former one because for me, it is more convincing than otherwise. Certainly, I stand on this perception because of following reasons.
One of the reasons is that media focuses too much on issues attracting people’s attentions such as scandals. Even if someone is regarded as a hero for public, it is highly easy for media to destroy her reputation by disclosing her private issues, since media wants to increase the number of views to their articles or videos. Therefore, it is difficult for anyone to sustain their image as a hero while media only interested in attracting viewers present. On the other hand, some people contend that media enabled the reputation of hero to be spread quickly to the public, so it is media that creates hero, not ruins hero’s public image. Although it seems plausible suggestion at first, further researches show that it is a short-sighted opinion. It is true that media can induce public to regard someone as a hero, however then media itself will disrupt the hero in short time, since they need some shocking news to capture people’s attention and news dealing with negative aspects of hero is more proper topic than anything such as a national sports star’s sex scandal which destroyed all of his fame by one article.
An additional contention that cause me to support this side is that for better or worse, intense media scrutiny raises a presumption, at least in the public's collective mind, that their hero is guilty of some sort of character flaw or misdeed. This presumption is understandable. After all, I think any demographic study would show that the vast majority of people relying on mainstream media for their information lack the sort of critical-thinking skills and objectivity to see beyond what the media feeds them, and to render a fair and fully informed judgment about a public figure--heroic or otherwise. As I mentioned above, media tends to display the most controversial issues at the most front and people just absorb what they watch and listen through media without any rational doubt. For example, no matter how creditable a hero is, people will follow one article about a hero’s flaw dealt with in famous media, since they think media does not offer false information.
In summary, I strongly hold the opinion that media scrutiny tends to destroy the reputation of anyone regarded as a hero in modern society, because media pursues profit by offering provocative issues and people just accept information from media without serious critics.
- The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Alta Manufacturing."During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Exper 63
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that they have more leisure time.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for t 50
- "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." - Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or dis 66
- Claim: It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero. Reason: The reputation of anyone who is subjected to media scrutiny will eventually be diminished. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agr 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, so, then, therefore, while, after all, at least, for example, i think, in short, in summary, sort of, such as, in my opinion, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 33.0505617978 124% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2395.0 2235.4752809 107% => OK
No of words: 474.0 442.535393258 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05274261603 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66599839874 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76378152394 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 255.0 215.323595506 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537974683544 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 749.7 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 3.10617977528 322% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 91.9952232116 60.3974514979 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 149.6875 118.986275619 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.625 23.4991977007 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.9375 5.21951772744 210% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213292653854 0.243740707755 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0713701295503 0.0831039109588 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0596057838294 0.0758088955206 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133532340935 0.150359130593 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0242209923865 0.0667264976115 36% => 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: 17.2 14.1392134831 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.8420337079 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 100.480337079 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.