Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
The statement justifies the utility of scandals because it focuses on our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. I partly agree with the statement because I think it depends on types of scandals.
Scandals create possibilities for public participation. In the spread of scandals, everyone can be an informant. They may be first informed of a scandal via other friends or from social media, but then they become the source to spread the scandal. Scandals can easily become a common topic because people can express their attitudes toward them. Scandals involve people in a way that few speakers or reformers can succeed.
Based on the influence of scandals, they can be a double-edged sword. They can promote social change as well as destroy a person's life. For example, a scandal about Harvey’s sexual harassment of actresses has led to a worldwide "me-too" movement. As one of the most successful film producer in Hollywood, Harvey's power was hard to be challenged, but his scandal caught people's attention and aroused their anger. At the end, encouraged by people's support, more and more victims came to the front stage to speak, which catalyzed an influential social movement.
On the other hand, if a scandal is not reliable and full of lies, it may cause incredible damage to the people involved. Sometimes scandals are made deliberately to attack others; it is easy to arouse the public's emotions through a compelling story. I have heard that people, suffering from internet violence caused by scandals, left the entertainment industry forever and became depressed. There is also a fan, obsessive in her love toward a famous singer, did harm to one of her colleagues when the colleague was discussing the scandal of the singer and said something about him.
Overall, I agree that scandals can focus our attention in ways that a speaker or reformer ever could. This attribute, however, can either lead to a positive solution to a social problem or cause incredible damage to targeted people.
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be 54
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoni 54
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and suppo 83
- Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.Write a response in which you discuss the e 75
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In deve 62
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 123, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...mote social change as well as destroy a persons life. For example, a scandal about Har...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, then, well, for example, i think, as well as, on the other hand
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: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 33.0505617978 82% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 58.6224719101 75% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1714.0 2235.4752809 77% => OK
No of words: 337.0 442.535393258 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08605341246 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28457229495 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86912471958 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.578635014837 0.4932671777 117% => OK
syllable_count: 533.7 704.065955056 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.9836303273 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.2222222222 118.986275619 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7222222222 23.4991977007 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.72222222222 5.21951772744 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 10.2758426966 19% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 5.13820224719 272% => Less 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: 0.250959027017 0.243740707755 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0837135942689 0.0831039109588 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103257198393 0.0758088955206 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161240091966 0.150359130593 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0981131048664 0.0667264976115 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.1392134831 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.