Giving detailed descriptions of crimes in newspapers and on TV can have negative consequences,so this kind of information should be restricted in the media. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The role of media has become increasingly significant in recent years. In order to attract more attention of the public, some media companies can go so far as to provide details about criminal acts in news and television, which implies negative implications. I completely agree with this view as the movement can act as a catalyst for juvenile delinquency and help those potential criminals facilitate their crimes.
The first reason why I oppose the presentation of unlawful acts on media channels is that it would encourage young individuals to get involved in law-breaking behaviors. It is well-known that youngsters have a tendency to imitate patterns of behavior that are appealing to them. And law-offending ones, which are broadcast on the mass media, and cause horror to people, would be ideal for them.
Another explanation for my objection to showcasing the process of law violating is that habitual criminals, who have broken the regulation time to time, would utilize the crime process given as materials to adjust their crime plans. Given that the criminals are more well-planned in their actions, it would be difficult for the police to investigate the crimes and figure out the culprits behind the crime scences. This makes these law-offenders become more unpredictable and dangerous.
Finally, if the victims of the crimes read or watch the programmes about them, it would fuel their fear and remind them of the pain or loss that they have experienced. Likewise, audience, who receive such information would have a feeling of disgust. The making of the crimes, therefore, irritates users of the media platforms, and sparks controversy among people.
In sum, description crimes, in general, cause unwanted consequences on young minds and the watchers. I thus totally object to the development.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, if, likewise, so, therefore, thus, well, as to, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1537.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 290.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94339180051 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 176.041082164 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606896551724 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 474.3 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.8210784302 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.785714286 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7142857143 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.28571428571 7.06120827912 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.67935871743 35% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174739432144 0.244688304435 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0526951761189 0.084324248473 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0279484188557 0.0667982634062 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0863045205978 0.151304729494 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0297581789407 0.056905535591 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.0946893788 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.69 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.