Some people believe that famous people’s support towards international aid organisations draw attention to problems and contribute significantly for their achievements. Do you agree or disagree?
The benefit brought to global aid organisations by participation of celebrities has arisen arguments in our society. Apparently, I am of the opinion that the contributions made by them to these organisations’ programs are minor compared to significant potential drawbacks because the distraction created by their appearances and personal scandals that may have negative effects on social campaigns.
On the one hand, the most persuasive argument stems from the fact that the foreseeable distraction from main objectives may be raised once celebrities appear in the pubic. Obviously, celebrities who often desire to raise their own profile and reputations instead of focusing on the programs’ outcomes. Consequently, when these famous stars mainly focus on polishing their brands and enhancing the publicity, the crowd of fans tend to get involved into these events only to see their faces or praise their achievements rather promoting the actual meaning of projects. As illustrations, there is a huge number of Tom Hank’s fans may attend in a support charity, that is primarily organised to provide donation for disable children, to celebrate his new top-hit movies and forget about donations.
In addition, I am strongly in favor of many when considering the personal scandals of celebrities may have damaging effects on the achievements of these authorities. Firstly, once these organisations select inappropriate people to represent at public speech, it may lead to unwanted detrimental consequences. As a result, the public views may be turned into the negative way, then these projects may lose the concentration and belief of communities. For instance, if Carlos, a soccer star who was facing a controversy towards sexual scandals in the World Cup league, appears on the stage to raise funds for women living with mental health issues, inhabitants might argue about the serious aims of the campaign.
In conclusion, it is sometime believed by some that the contributions of celebrities to programs made by international aid organisations are positive. However, my stance is that their participation have negative impacts on those due to distraction from public determinations and scandals in their lives.
- Some people feel that paparazzi should not follow celebrities and invade their privacy by taking pictures of them everywhere, while others believe this is just the price of fame.Discuss both sides and give your opinion. Give reasons for your answer, and i 89
- The table below shows the percentage of the population by age groups in one town who rode bicycles in 2011. 78
- The graph shows the information about international conferences in three capital cities in 1980-2010. 67
- Some people believe that famous people’s support towards international aid organisations draw attention to problems and contribute significantly for their achievements. Do you agree or disagree? 93
- Parent often give children everything they ask for and do what they like. Is it good for children? What are the consequences when they grow up? 67
Comments
OMG the second 8.0 essay made
OMG the second 8.0 essay made by me, really? amazing!!! thank testbig. This is exactly the way I should focus on to practice.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 164, Rule ID: PUBIC_X[1]
Message: Did you mean 'public'?
Suggestion: public
...y raised once celebrities appear in the pubic. Obviously, celebrities who often desir...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 803, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...-hit movies and forget about donations. In addition, I am strongly in favor of m...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, but, consequently, first, firstly, if, may, so, then, while, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, as a result
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 : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1886.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 341.0 315.596192385 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53079178886 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30698703652 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.601173020528 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 588.6 506.74238477 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 31.0 20.2975951904 153% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 65.2339717814 49.4020404114 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 171.454545455 106.682146367 161% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.0 20.7667163134 149% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.4545454545 7.06120827912 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178654007358 0.244688304435 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0625464431172 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0489774036427 0.0667982634062 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115143824529 0.151304729494 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0387403227115 0.056905535591 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.1 13.0946893788 153% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.55 50.2224549098 63% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.3001002004 147% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.39 12.4159519038 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.94 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 78.4519038076 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.78957915832 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.1190380762 142% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => 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.