With an increasing population communication via the internet and text messaging, face to face communication will become a thing of the past.
To what extend do you agree?
Technological progress in the last couple of decades has been astonishing, which has altered, to varying extents, every aspect of our lives. Internet, arguably one of the most evolutionary technologies, play a big role in our daily lives now and the way we interact with each other. Unlike the past, where people had to meet in person for discussing matters, the general population has turned to their smartphones and internet for interactions with each other recently. The effects of online communication and whether it will wipe-out the need for in-person meeting completely are discussed below.
Some people argue that it is better to use internet instead of physically present discussions for communications. To begin with, they claim, online interactions are much less time consuming as there is no need for travelling from one place to another. It also is much cost effective as you pay only for internet bandwidth charges, which are normally nominal, while you communicate with other users around the globe. In addition to that finding someone you need to interact, is much easier online. For example, despite not knowing the exact physical location of a person or being too distant for physical meeting, one can send a message through many online platforms such as Facebook, Whatsapp, Viber, etc and receive a reply either instantly or at most in 24 hours time.
Nonetheless others may point out that despite numerous benefits that are endowed by online interactions, it still has its limitations. First of all, their is still a slim chance that the person you try to reach online is either unable or has chosen not to access internet. In some countries internet connection, especially in the rural areas, is not available and yet a huge population is living there. A handful of other people, concerned about their privacy, do not interact through internet. In addition, In instances where prompt response is desired, online interaction is often ineffective and other ways of contacting, including face-to-face meeting, shall be sought. Similarly, another benefit of meeting others in-person is that it is more effective for persuasion while discussing important matters.
To conclude, unless someday we have hologram technology indistinguishable from the reality, one-to-one meeting for interactions are irreplaceable in important situations. In daily life though, interacting over the internet is a preferred option that saves us a lot of time and money.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-07-03 | carolyn | 78 | view |
| 2016-10-13 | ahmad3khan | 84 | view |
- With an increasing population communication via the internet and text messaging, face to face communication will become a thing of the past. To what extend do you agree? 84
- Small businesses should avoid recruiting young women who do not have their own family in order to avoid paying maternity leave later on.To what extend do you agree or disagree? 81
- Some people think that the only way to have success in business is to have a unique product What factors do you think influence the success of a company 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Nonetheless,
...ntly or at most in 24 hours time. Nonetheless others may point out that despite numer...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 151, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...ill has its limitations. First of all, their is still a slim chance that the person ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 284, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'countries'' or 'country's'?
Suggestion: countries'; country's
...chosen not to access internet. In some countries internet connection, especially in the ...
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'if', 'may', 'nonetheless', 'similarly', 'so', 'still', 'while', 'for example', 'in addition', 'such as', 'first of all', 'to begin with']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.211363636364 0.247107183377 86% => OK
Verbs: 0.161363636364 0.155533422707 104% => OK
Adjectives: 0.109090909091 0.0946595960268 115% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0636363636364 0.0501214627716 127% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0431818181818 0.0437548338989 99% => OK
Prepositions: 0.138636363636 0.122226691241 113% => OK
Participles: 0.0522727272727 0.0403226058552 130% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.96799795654 2.80594681477 106% => OK
Infinitives: 0.025 0.0326793684256 77% => OK
Particles: 0.00227272727273 0.00163938923432 139% => OK
Determiners: 0.0704545454545 0.0861772015684 82% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00909090909091 0.021408717616 42% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0136363636364 0.011925033212 114% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2492.0 1933.35771543 129% => OK
No of words: 392.0 316.048096192 124% => OK
Chars per words: 6.35714285714 6.12580529183 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44960558625 4.20517956788 106% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.413265306122 0.374742101984 110% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.313775510204 0.28420135186 110% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.239795918367 0.203846283523 118% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.158163265306 0.137316102897 115% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96799795654 2.80594681477 106% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 176.037074148 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594387755102 0.56093040696 106% => OK
Word variations: 71.4837945077 60.7387585426 118% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0891783567 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0588235294 20.7743622355 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.1077050376 49.517814964 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.588235294 127.492653851 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0588235294 20.7743622355 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.823529411765 0.814263465372 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38877755511 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.99599198397 75% => OK
Readability: 54.4363745498 49.1944974215 111% => OK
Elegance: 1.5 1.69124875643 89% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.277529504675 0.332605444948 83% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.103503770319 0.102741220458 101% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0495084512514 0.0668466124924 74% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.505848016482 0.534860350844 95% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.101679452912 0.148594505496 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109651167066 0.134430193775 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0557327914771 0.0742795772207 75% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.323090864059 0.324371583561 100% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0516013807243 0.0638462369009 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.191903487504 0.228012699653 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.057334412965 0.058150111329 99% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.68436873747 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.41683366733 117% => OK
Positive topic words: 10.0 5.90881763527 169% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 2.5751503006 78% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 1.9629258517 153% => OK
Total topic words: 15.0 10.4468937876 144% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.