Some people believe it is often necessary even desirable for political leaders to withhold information from the public Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns wit

Essay topics:

Some people believe it is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed.

Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.

How would responsible political leaders treat with various information for the public that they serve? There exists two contradictory views: someone believes that it is necessary for them to withhold information from the demotic, while others argue that the public has a right to be fully informed. In my humble view, I tend to give my support to the latter as it guarantees fundamental equality in citizens, while I reserve my approval for the former because it leads to several detrimental results.

To start off, under certain circumstances, it is beneficial for leaders to conceal sensitive information for the public, because such information, if exposed, will cast potentially negative influences on the society as a whole. For instance, information relevant with national defense or military deployment, belong to such category. Supposed that we publicize such secrets to the public merely for the purpose of serving the principle of information transparency, it is likely that terrorists or potential enemies of the nation might utilize such messages to demolish facilities or slaughter innocents. This is the situation which we are definitely unwilling to see. In this sense, contemplation of national security endows leaders with responsibility to withdraw from sharing secrets without reservation.

However, tenable as such view hold in some cases, I have to contend that exclusive emphasis of hiding sensitive information would inversely give rise to grim results for governments. Since iniquity of information might be utilized by politician with low morality for their private ends, such asymmetry might generate potential delinquencies and dire corruptions. Furthermore, even terrible result is that such venal behaviors can be further deteriorated out of ensuing information protection. In this sense, it is likely to invoke a negative self-aggrandizing circle, which might drag governments into incorrigible holes. For example, at the very beginning of coronavirus in Wuhan, several irresponsible government officials eschewed with confirming existence of this epidemic in order to keep so-called social stability. However, without immediate process, Wuhan now later had to suffer city lockdown more than two months. It is withholding unnecessary information and default of officials that make more citizens to be plagued by this tragedy.

Furthermore, given the nature and long-term goal of politics, the idea that government should disclose the truth for the demotic could build public trust and promote settlement of social issue, which further accelerates political efficiency. In this first place, exposure of information is able to build up efficient surveillance for political officials and enhance their esteem among the public. Therefore, people are willing to trust their integrity and accordingly execute their orders. On another hand, as information is divulged in public, leaders’ illegal behaviors will be restricted, which helps to break the negative corruption circle mentioned above. For supporting examples, we can go no further to how China's central government response to coronavirus, after understanding urgent quandary of Wuhan. From Chairman Xi to every responsible official, they stick to deliver the latest epidemic updates to Chinese citizens every day. Despite the fact that virus increased greatly at the initial phase, such transparent information not only win respect of the public, but also facilitate to overall progress of fight with virus.

In summary, despite the fact that political officials might hide information for the sake of nation security or other reasons, we shouldn't advocate such policy as a general guideline, considering dire consequences mentioned above. Conversely, it is necessary to guarantee the public to learn comprehensive information, in order to accelerate society equality and consolidate national cohesion.

Votes
Average: 9.4 (3 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 131, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...of nation security or other reasons, we shouldnt advocate such policy as a general guide...
^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, conversely, first, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, in summary, such as, in some cases

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 33.0505617978 127% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 87.0 58.6224719101 148% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 12.9106741573 225% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3320.0 2235.4752809 149% => OK
No of words: 580.0 442.535393258 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.72413793103 5.05705443957 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.90746259869 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09966435987 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 327.0 215.323595506 152% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563793103448 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 1071.9 704.065955056 152% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 17.0 4.38483146067 388% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.3960655649 60.3974514979 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.333333333 118.986275619 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1666666667 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.33333333333 5.21951772744 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => 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: 0.341497577572 0.243740707755 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0925023902293 0.0831039109588 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0686586574202 0.0758088955206 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190639887585 0.150359130593 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0614027718231 0.0667264976115 92% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 48.8420337079 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.1743820225 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.19 12.1639044944 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.03 8.38706741573 120% => OK
difficult_words: 191.0 100.480337079 190% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.