Governments in democratic societies should not restrict the public's access to information, even if it is of sensitive or classified nature.
Write a response in which you examine your own position on the statement. Explore the extent to which you either agree or disagree with it, and support your reasoning with evidence and/or examples. Be sure to reflect on ways in which the statement might or might not be true, and how this informs your thinking on the subject.
Democracy, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, stands for - a government by the people, for the people and of the people. One might go as far as to argue that the people should have unrestricted access to information, since informed decisions will lead to better governance. To examine the consequences of such an action one must consider all its effects - the good and the ugly. In my opinion, public's access to sensitive and classified information should be restricted. However, a check must be placed on the government so that it does not abuse this monopoly over information.
The argument to provide public with unrestricted access to information in a democracy is based on the false assumption that everyone in the nation is more motivated towards the nation's betterment than their personal gains. An individual might, for instance, trade nation's secrets with inimical nations in return for some personal advantage. Such a scenario calls for restriction of public access to classified information - such as military deals and inventions for the military. Also, keeping such sensitive information in the open can easily be abused by enemies of the state. Such information, therefore, must be protected at all costs.
However, there must be a higher authority to audit the information. Lack of such a check on the government allows it to abuse the trust of the people. For instance, wikileaks had released the names of people who have amassed huge amount of black money in India by corruption. Some government dealings with other nations to procure military weapons and technologies are also ridden with corruption. Such bastardization in governance can not be checked if there is no transparency in governance. Hence people must be provided access to the information. The restriction on it, however, is necessary due to the reason stated before.
To conclude, one can say that the public must be allowed limited access to information because some information - of the sensitive and classified kind - can not be trusted to be shared with everyone. At the same time, however, nation can not ignore the right to information of its citizens. This endangers the very tenets of democracy. Hence, there is a very thin line that must be followed for optimal governance.
- The following appeared in a memorandum from the owner of Movies Galore, a chain of movie-rental stores."Because of declining profits, we must reduce operating expenses at Movies Galore's ten movie-rental stores. Raising prices is not a good opti 53
- The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.“Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village r 83
- Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as 58
- Governments in democratic societies should not restrict the public's access to information, even if it is of sensitive or classified nature.Write a response in which you examine your own position on the statement. Explore the extent to which you eith 50
- The government should ultimately be responsible for the health, welfare and prosperity of its own citizens.Write a response discussing your reaction to the stated policy.Justify your reasoning for the position you take. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 178, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'nations'' or 'nation's'?
Suggestion: nations'; nation's
...he nation is more motivated towards the nations betterment than their personal gains. A...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 495, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...there is no transparency in governance. Hence people must be provided access to the i...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, however, if, so, therefore, as to, for instance, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 33.0505617978 42% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 12.9106741573 232% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1899.0 2235.4752809 85% => OK
No of words: 369.0 442.535393258 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14634146341 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96694231803 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 215.323595506 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.493224932249 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 612.0 704.065955056 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 6.24550561798 16% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.040770631 60.3974514979 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.4285714286 118.986275619 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5714285714 23.4991977007 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.21951772744 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
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: 0.109441607252 0.243740707755 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0396269612899 0.0831039109588 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0392293066373 0.0758088955206 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0788505313567 0.150359130593 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0330889250071 0.0667264976115 50% => 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: 11.6 14.1392134831 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.29 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 100.480337079 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.