The use of electronic media has a negative effect on personal relationships between people.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In the past, personal relationship means to interact face-to-face between people. While the inventions of electronic media have brought the detrimental effect to that statement, I would argue the benefits such as, maintaining relationship in long distance and be acquaintance with plenty friends outweigh the drawback like antisocial behavior.
it seems to me that electronic media involve much positive effect on human relationships. Thanks to Graham Bell the creator of hand phones, his findings establishing us to keep in touch with long distance friends or families whenever we feel hankers. Not only this, the internet discoveries send us to the further step of human history, when it combines with yours digital media it creates a powerful weapon for that personal connection. To exemplify, latest smartphones allowed us to have a set eyes communication with interlocutor. In addition, from social media (facebook, twitter, and whatsapp) we can be acquaintance with different people around the world.
In fact, the corrosive effect of that technology is depending on the users. They can choose to become addictive in their gadget or not. For instance, in Jakarta the group of teenagers in a café where preoccupied with their personal computer rather than talking to each other; it also noticeable that pedestrian in this city looks at their smartphone more often than behold to the pavement. In conclusion, it is your choice, take that negative effect and become asocial or the opposite.
The aforementioned evidence reveals that digital media have merit and demerit consequences. However, the advantages of that digital media are inevitable. it is clearly seen greater than the detrimental effect. where possible act more responsibly when you use that technology.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-03-23 | rslmsayu | 89 | view |
| 2022-08-07 | nguvl | 78 | view |
| 2021-08-20 | Hoangnhi2802 | 81 | view |
| 2019-09-24 | AbdullahArman | 84 | view |
| 2017-07-04 | saeed saamaadii | 72 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...drawback like antisocial behavior. it seems to me that electronic media invol...
^^
Line 9, column 50, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...the corrosive effect of that technology is depending on the users. They can choose to become...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 155, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...s of that digital media are inevitable. it is clearly seen greater than the detrim...
^^
Line 13, column 211, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Where
...en greater than the detrimental effect. where possible act more responsibly when you ...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 211, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “where” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...en greater than the detrimental effect. where possible act more responsibly when you ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, look, so, while, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 24.0651302605 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1509.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 276.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.46739130435 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99900871041 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.623188405797 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 467.1 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.6832804702 49.4020404114 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.6 106.682146367 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.26666666667 7.06120827912 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.197239723099 0.244688304435 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0621954492731 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0501389363674 0.0667982634062 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115495727534 0.151304729494 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0481927723058 0.056905535591 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.0946893788 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.39 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 78.4519038076 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.