Some people say that citizens should be given freedom to express their personal opinions and concerns about the social problems on the Internet.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Efflorescence of technological innovations has culminated and gave birth to the Internet, a medium for not only reception of information, but also thoughts expression for multitudinous citizens through social networks, forums and similar websites. Such a development raised a consensus that citizenship should be accompanied by freedom of speech regarding contemporary social affairs in this environment. From my standpoint, I uphold that notion in complete agreement.
To initiate, my underpinning for proposing internet free flow of information is its ability to convey citizens’ needs and demands to governments. Previously, voicing opinions on social matters was impeded by numerous arduities such as lack of funding and adequate means. Now, only through simple status updates being posted on social networks, people could bring their topic into the center of attention through vast availability of fellow users, forcing the government to take corresponding measures toward the issue. Hence, only through this can people’s pressing be adequately addressed and alleviated. To corroborate, thanks to the Internet, ambiguities surrounding a twelfth-grade female student’s traffic collision that resulted in casualty were resolved. Without such freedom, dissatisfaction of the government is indispensable, stoking up public anger, catalyzing demonstration or even revolution. Their people will happily devote themselves to working for their beloved government, puting the country’s prosperity in a secure position.
On the other hand, there exists a group of people deeming that unrestricted content on the Internet could stir up grave misconceptions. Thus, it is important to impose controlling policies. Nevertheless, this notion besets itself with fallacies. To rebut, I start off by highlighting that Internet users are not constituted by a group of inadequately educated people. For example, the news lambaste a man who raped a teenager and a certain person palliate for the man by rounding the case down to the child’s scanty clothing, that comment will also be subjected to lacerbations and counterarguments, thus prevent any deivation from the norm. However, even if such misconceptions were not to be rebutted, it is every user’s responsibility to use their personal principles to decide truth and falsehood. Ultimately, the risk of online freedom of speech spreading misinformation is unfounded.
In short, I strongly reaffirm my point that citizens should be guaranteed their online free flow of information considering the points aforementioned.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-25 | hungdung2507 | 89 | view |
- Some people think that success should be measured by the material possessions a person has acquired while others think it should be judged by the knowledge he or she has 89
- The graph below gives historical information and projections about changes in population in the United States Nigeria and Japan Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 92
- In the past it was unusual for most people to change careers more than once or twice Now it is quite common for people to have ten or more different jobs in their lifetimes What are the advantages and disadvantages of such a change 72
- There are a lot of positives and negatives about using public transport Discuss both sides 78
- Some people think that success should be measured by the material possessions a person has acquired while others think it should be judged by the knowledge he or she has 79
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 645, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... To corroborate, thanks to the Internet, ambiguities surrounding a twelfth-grade ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, nevertheless, regarding, so, thus, for example, in short, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 41.998997996 138% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2199.0 1615.20841683 136% => OK
No of words: 376.0 315.596192385 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.84840425532 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40348946061 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.40516007758 2.80592935109 121% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 176.041082164 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.63829787234 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 667.8 506.74238477 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.9722159968 49.4020404114 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.166666667 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8888888889 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.38888888889 7.06120827912 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.210684704862 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0538797471284 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.034836502873 0.0667982634062 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123241010657 0.151304729494 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0203669270281 0.056905535591 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.0946893788 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 50.2224549098 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.65 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.68 8.58950901804 124% => OK
difficult_words: 144.0 78.4519038076 184% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => 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.