Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Although this reasoning cannot serve as a justification, it is a sad truth that scandals are useful for focusing governments and society attention on specific problems. In fact, scandals help promoting topics on the political and societal agenda. This argument might hold true in several areas, such as environmental scandals, political scandals and human rights scandals. However, speakers and reformers can also play this role and the two views are not opposite one, but complementaries.
In the environmental field, scandals such as the recent Amazon fires had as a result the prominence of the topic in every international newspaper and in every country. This case is particularly interesting because the Amazon deforestation has been a problem for several decades. Even if it is true that many public policies and non-profit interventions had addressed this problem and diminished it impacts, this was still an issue. Nonetheless, it was only after the problem reach huge dimensions that the international and political attention was given to it. In other words, now there is an opportunity to pass bills and work in a more structural way in order to find a better solution for this issue,
In the political realm, scandals can also have as, a positive externality, the fact of shedding light in particular questions that were not given much attention. An interesting illustration of that, can be made from the very famous Watergate scandal. The result was that Nixon renounce the presidency. The episode was useful for focusing attention in illegal staple and it effects on the democratic process. It was also important for elevating the moral standards expected from a politician.
Regarding the human rights and corporations area, there are several scandals that helped raising some questions. A very popular case was the accusation of slave work within the Zara Industry. After the scandal revelation, the company was obliged to change a lot of policy and procedures, but, also, the fiscalization among other similar brands was increased. Another example is the disaster of Mariana and Brumadinho caused by mining companies in Brazil. The very tragic episode put in the agenda discussions about corporate responsibility and more sustainable alternatives.
The examples given show that scandals might be an opportunity for raising attention in a specific topic. However, this cannot be opposed to the very important role that speakers and reformers have. This two alternatives are not mutually exclusive. Actually, reformers and speakers have an important role of avoiding scandals.
- Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people. 66
- The following appeared in a recommendation from the planning department of the city of Transopolis."Ten years ago, as part of a comprehensive urban renewal program, the city of Transopolis adapted for industrial use a large area of severely substanda 35
- The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries. 50
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. 79
- Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 193, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to promote' or 'promote'.
Suggestion: to promote; promote
...ecific problems. In fact, scandals help promoting topics on the political and societal ag...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 491, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... not opposite one, but complementaries. In the environmental field, scandals suc...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 90, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to raise' or 'raise'.
Suggestion: to raise; raise
... there are several scandals that helped raising some questions. A very popular case was...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, nonetheless, regarding, so, still, in fact, in particular, such as, as a result, in other words, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 58.6224719101 67% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2207.0 2235.4752809 99% => OK
No of words: 407.0 442.535393258 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4226044226 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49157444576 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03757853392 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 215.323595506 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528255528256 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 709.2 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.5584950936 60.3974514979 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.318181818 118.986275619 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.40909090909 5.21951772744 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.175991917138 0.243740707755 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0502323687487 0.0831039109588 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0437322457641 0.0758088955206 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0998811342812 0.150359130593 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0408722081077 0.0667264976115 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.1392134831 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 100.480337079 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 Out of 6
---------------------
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.