Technological advancement in digital and print media opened doors to new set of problems. Celebrity status comes with a price, agreed by all, but unnecessary intervention into their life-style by reporters might disturb their work-life balance. It is true, news about famous people gets public attention, but that is no excuse for anybody to breach their privacy. In this context, I am totally against the view' invading private life of well known personality is a part of success package'. In this essay I will try to deduce various scenarios depicting both points with relevant examples.
First of all, growing paparazzi culture tarnishing image of a celebrity and peace of mind. In recent days, television reporters who tried to take pictures of an actress at an airport received severe backlash from society. Furthermore, as long as unfair media trial continues, sense of freedom will be lost. On the other hand, sense of suspicion that they are always watched by someone, keeps them psychologically challenged. For example, in an interview -olympic athlete Rajesh described that frequent vigilance of media caused him stress and ultimately resulted in underperformance. We listen many such stories in cases of actors and other talented artists. Secondly, it is waste of time to common audience to know everything about their favourite hero or heroine.
On other side of spectrum, we have people who argue that the attention given to public figures is for their own good as it keeps them steady in their professional life. Moreover, according to them, it's dream come true for many people to be in limelight and occupy space in front page of a reputed newspaper. However, sociologists suggest that deep research is necessary before generalising these concepts. Nevertheless, we don't have any right jeopardising the private life of an important person as it may even cause fatalities. Classic example is ,the erratic behaviour of a reporter caused death of Princess Diana. Before it's too late, we all should condemn such heinous acts.
Therefore, we can safely conclude the topic by saying that responsible journalism has no place for unrelated cover story of a celebrity. Instead, they can concentrate on sensation topics which will be helpful for both citizens and journalists career. Ofcourse, government can control freedom of speech but till then we too have power to discourage satellite channels whenever they telecast rubbish content.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 196, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ry intervention into their life-style by reporters might disturb their work-life ...
^^
Line 3, column 479, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... in an interview -olympic athlete Rajesh described that frequent vigilance of med...
^^
Line 4, column 424, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...lising these concepts. Nevertheless, we dont have any right jeopardising the private...
^^^^
Line 4, column 548, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ven cause fatalities. Classic example is ,the erratic behaviour of a reporter caus...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, for example, first of all, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 24.0651302605 150% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2059.0 1615.20841683 127% => OK
No of words: 391.0 315.596192385 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26598465473 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85873791056 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 176.041082164 148% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.664961636829 0.561755894193 118% => OK
syllable_count: 652.5 506.74238477 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.9681974342 49.4020404114 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 98.0476190476 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.619047619 20.7667163134 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06120827912 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.9879759519 251% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240697544439 0.244688304435 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0543645418505 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0502111201995 0.0667982634062 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12746168141 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0577669607569 0.056905535591 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.0946893788 97% => 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: 13.29 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.7 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 78.4519038076 163% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.