A rather delicate point of contention is whether publishers are free to provide private details about people. On the one side there is the free press crowd, which argues that freedom of expression is absolute for the print media. On the other side are those that argue less dogmatic and take into account the possibility that certain information could be harmful and should thus not be made publicly available. And indeed, I believe that the media has a special responsibility to only publish those details that are aboslutely necessary to advance the understanding or the credibility of a news story. Hence, it should always be seriously considered whether publishing personal details is absolutely required.
Is it really necessary to know whether the newly elected prime minister has had an affair with a young woman a year ago? And do we need to see the photographs of this woman all over the print media together with her address and what she is doing for a living? The answers to these questions are not necessarily straightforward, especially as I advocate for caution when publishing private details.
This example has actually emerged in recent news when it was revealed that the new british prime minister Boris Johnson was romantically involved with someone while in a relationship. This detail in itself should not be revealed to the public as it is a private matter for the various parties involved and there is no ‘public interest’ other than of a voyeuristic nature.
However, it came to light that this lady the prime minister was amoursly involved with, also was the recipient of a large sum of money for her business. This is where the context changes: what previously was an entirely private matter has now become a potential criminal act that must be investigated by the media. Hence, it is fully ethical to publish private details about the affair and the persons involved as it provides crucial context for how public money was spend.
In conclusion, private details can be published in situations where it advances or explains stories that are of truly public interest, but should be avoided if publishing only serves to satisfy some curiosity about someone’s lifestyle.
- The diagram below shows how geothermal energy is used to produce electricity. 11
- Modern cultures around the world have become similar when compared to the past. What are the reasons? Is it a positive or negative development? 89
- The graphs below give information about computer ownership as a percentage of the population between 2002 and 2010, and by level of education for the years 2002 and 2010.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comp 84
- The charts below show degree granted in different fields at the National University in the years 1990 2000 and 2010 84
- The diagram below shows how geothermal energy is used to produce electricity. 11
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 160, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'someone' must be used with a third-person verb: 'whiles'.
Suggestion: whiles
... was romantically involved with someone while in a relationship. This detail in itsel...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 468, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'spent'.
Suggestion: spent
...rucial context for how public money was spend. In conclusion, private details can ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, hence, however, if, really, so, thus, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 13.1623246493 213% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 24.0651302605 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1858.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 365.0 315.596192385 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0904109589 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83828211677 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542465753425 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 596.7 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 37.0323217898 49.4020404114 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.714285714 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0714285714 20.7667163134 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.64285714286 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198642840565 0.244688304435 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0710579212817 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0483927125109 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113037944674 0.151304729494 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0572935581317 0.056905535591 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 50.2224549098 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 78.4519038076 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.