Q2 :Some people believe famous people's support towards international aid organizations draws the attention to problems, while others think celebrities make the problems less important. Discuss both views and give your opinions.
Recently, the impact of celebrities' assistance on ordinary people has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that influencers can increase individuals' attention to social issues by supporting global charities, while others argue otherwise. Personally, I wholeheartedly agree with the former stance. In the following essay, both views will be discussed before a conclusion is reached with my opinion.
On the one hand, those who claim that public figures' aid toward socially disadvantaged people negatively affects the individual do so for several reasons. Proponents of this argument insist that some renowned people tend to exploit charitable activities in order to obtain fame and wealth. As an illustration, a Korean singer-songwriter named Kim Hun patronised a global charitable foundation in 2015. However, according to an article released by the Seoul Times, it turned out that the main purpose of his donation was receiving tax waivers. Given these points, some people hold the view that entertainers can worsen the essence of help.
My opinion, however, is that the positive effects of celebrities' monetary support toward global charitable institutions are more significant. Perhaps the most compelling reason is that not only can they inform the importance of financial assistance, but they are also able to raise awareness amongst the public given that they are often exposed to mass media. In addition, a multitude of fans of public figures have a predisposition to participate in charitable work when their idols partake in it. To exemplify, Lionel Messi spent approximately 3 million US dollars on a charitable organisation in South Africa in a bid to deal with global hunger in the year 2018, which led a myriad of his keen supporters to become interested in poverty. As a result, they donated around 5 million US dollars. In light of the above, I find these more persuasive.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that there are a variety of opinions about this topic. However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that well-known people's aid toward international charitable institutions positively impacts on society for the reasons discussed above.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 361, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t they are often exposed to mass media. In addition, a multitude of fans of publ...
^^
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that well-kno...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, well, while, in addition, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1876.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 349.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37535816619 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06492499745 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 176.041082164 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.63323782235 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 607.5 506.74238477 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.9108746265 49.4020404114 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.352941176 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5294117647 20.7667163134 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.70588235294 7.06120827912 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213106602411 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0591693265445 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0603603233098 0.0667982634062 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136146464314 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0603354734671 0.056905535591 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.83 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 78.4519038076 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 361, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t they are often exposed to mass media. In addition, a multitude of fans of publ...
^^
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that well-kno...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, well, while, in addition, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1876.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 349.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37535816619 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06492499745 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 176.041082164 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.63323782235 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 607.5 506.74238477 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.9108746265 49.4020404114 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.352941176 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5294117647 20.7667163134 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.70588235294 7.06120827912 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213106602411 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0591693265445 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0603603233098 0.0667982634062 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136146464314 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0603354734671 0.056905535591 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.83 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 78.4519038076 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.