It is important to read or watch news presented by people with different views than by similar view. Do you agree or disagree?
In this modern era which we are living in, news are of the greatest importance for people since they like to increase their knowledge and their information by being aware about what events are happening in the whole world. Personally speaking, I am of the opinion that read or watch news represented by people with different views is much more beneficial due to some reasons. I will elaborate upon the momentous reasons in the following paragraph.
The first point worth mentioning would be that people obtaining news from fundamentally different resources can gather much more information about the news. It is crystal-clear that should people obtain news represented by different people, they would be able to realize all true aspects of the news. Inasmuch as opponents and proponents would represent the news differently. In addition rumors are always flying around, so we must be careful about the accuracy of what we hear. A prime example of president election in my country may shade some light on this point. Several years ago, after election, some people showed their deep dissatisfaction about the low degree of accuracy in the whole process. Media such as TV and newspaper which were in favor of the accuracy of election tried to show the number of dissatisfied people insignificant; in contrast, media such as magazine that caste doubt on the accuracy of election tried to show criticism too many. Having followed both of them, I could have much more precise estimation about the number of dissatisfied people.
There is also a more subtle point we must consider. Grasping information from people with different perspective, human being would be able to advocate their point of view much better. A comprehensive knowledge is the key to success in different aspects of our lives, argument in particular. Should a person have an extensive knowledge about an event, he will be able to win an argument. In the previous example, after enriching my information about the election, not only was I able to participate in different discussion, but also I was able to be the winner. For example, one of my friend seeing just similar views was in the position that almost the whole society did not accept the result of election. Deeming, had not I followed a diverse range of media, I would not have been able to win different argument by providing enough reasonable evidence.
In the final analysis, according to above paragraphs, It is a foregone conclusion that the further information we gather, the further benefit we would gain at the end since news represented from different view can enrich our knowledge. Besides, we would win different argument by having a comprehensive prespective about the news. I highly recommend paying attention to different perspective inasmuch as it would bode well for ourselves.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-09-10 | fereshtehRR | 88 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 380, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: addition,
...ould represent the news differently. In addition rumors are always flying around, so we ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 185, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[4]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'comprehensive knowledge'.
Suggestion: Comprehensive knowledge
...vocate their point of view much better. A comprehensive knowledge is the key to success in different aspe...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, if, may, so, well, for example, in addition, in contrast, in particular, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 15.1003584229 146% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 13.8261648746 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 40.0 43.0788530466 93% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 52.1666666667 142% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 8.0752688172 272% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2362.0 1977.66487455 119% => OK
No of words: 465.0 407.700716846 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07956989247 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85410941822 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 212.727598566 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496774193548 0.524837075471 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 747.0 618.680645161 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.716199905 48.9658058833 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.476190476 100.406767564 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1428571429 20.6045352989 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.09523809524 5.45110844103 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.190416142416 0.236089414692 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.059392070816 0.076458572812 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0692640896952 0.0737576698707 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13338194807 0.150856017488 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.049264507661 0.0645574589148 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 11.7677419355 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 10.9000537634 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 86.8835125448 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.