These days, sports events for man is more popular in TV than women’s sport shows. A growing number of people having more interest in men’s sporting events is the main reason for this trend but I still believe that women’s sport shows have to be paid more attention by TV channels.
The major factor leading that TV channels broadcast more time for man’s sport shows is the number of audience for man tend to be higher for a long time. The viewer is the main reason for the revenue, investment and advertising contracts for entertainment corporations throughout the world. For example, in Sea Games, one of the most famous TV events of South East Asia, the number of viewers for men football is always significant higher than woman football. Therefore, giving men’s sports a higher priority is a wise strategy to earn large profits and attract more investment with millions of dollars.
However, I would argue that television shows makers should pay more attention and more time for women sport events. If the men’s sports programs continue to receive significantly more coverage than the programs for the opposite sex, it could increase the gender inequality throughout the world which is one of most serious issues in many parts of the world today. Additionally, in some recent years, women sports events are coming more popular thanks to the increase of millions of viewers every year. It also could bring lots of profits and valuable contracts for television companies.
In conclusion, it is true that man’s sport shows is taking more time on broadcast than women’s sport events but I believe that there should be a greater equality in the coverage between men’s and women’s sport.
- The diagram below shows how instant noodles are manufactured
- The chart below shows the results of a survey about people s coffee and tea buying and drinking habits in five Australian cities Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main feature and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The chart below shows the value of one country s exports in various categories during 2015 and 2016 The table shows the percentage change in each category of exports in 2016 compared with 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main 78
- Some people believe that hobbies need to be difficult to be enjoyable To what extent do you agree or disagree 67
- People drinks more and more sugar based drinks What is the reason for tgat What can be done for that 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, still, therefore, for example, in conclusion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 41.998997996 71% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1426.0 1615.20841683 88% => OK
No of words: 284.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02112676056 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55226074563 2.80592935109 91% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 176.041082164 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.507042253521 0.561755894193 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 414.9 506.74238477 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => 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: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.2504471425 49.4020404114 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.636363636 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8181818182 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.63636363636 7.06120827912 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.573909343834 0.244688304435 235% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.24162086289 0.084324248473 287% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.162619167229 0.0667982634062 243% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.406431652535 0.151304729494 269% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.094006375695 0.056905535591 165% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 50.2224549098 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.4159519038 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.58950901804 92% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 78.4519038076 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.