Technological access to online music and the like should be free or paid. What do you think?
The importance of providing access to online music should be made free or paid has always been a debatable topic. Even though, many people claim that online music should be made available free for users. Others reject this notion and argue that anything given free will reduce its value. In my opinion, latter proposition appears to be more rational. The following essay would further elaborate both sides with examples and thus lead to a plausible conclusion.
To begin with, in the fast-growing world, due to new inventions and developments many new apps are available in the app store to download. Providing free access to music through these apps or online will help so many struggling singers and composers to learn from the pre-recorded songs and music which will act as an encouragement to them. Moreover, it will be motivation to the upcoming singers and musicians. For instance, famous singers like SP, Chitra and many prominent singers from India have learned basics of singing and music from free source app which are pre-recorded and kept in online.
On the other hand, many people believe that anything given free reduces its popularity and market value. People take free source as granted and do not show adequate respect to singers and songs recorded by them. It also decreases the motivation of playback composers and they feel that the value of their songs has been decreased due to the advancements in technology such as YouTube, Saavn, My music and many more online apps. For instance, recently in India, a song composed by the great AR Rehman released directly into internet before releasing in the movie. This example clearly exemplifies us technological access to music should be paid.
According to the arguments aforementioned, one can reach out to the conclusion that anything is given for free will lose its priority, therefore, permissions to access music through online should be made chargeable.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-19 | Shruti gupta radhika | 85 | view |
| 2019-06-27 | harry J | 82 | view |
| 2019-06-27 | Navneet dhillon | 55 | view |
| 2019-06-27 | jashan randhawa | 77 | view |
| 2019-04-24 | zjaved | 80 | view |
- Creativity is inborn skill or can be developed through learning? your opinion? 80
- Creativity is inborn skill or can be developed through learning your opinion 76
- ageing people good/bad? 70
- ageing people good/bad? 70
- Do you think cashless society is realistic and why? What are the advantages and disadvantages? 77
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, moreover, so, therefore, thus, for instance, such as, in my opinion, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 6.10837438424 180% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 8.36945812808 191% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 5.94088669951 118% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 31.9359605911 128% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1620.0 1207.87684729 134% => OK
No of words: 316.0 242.827586207 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12658227848 5.00649968141 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 3.92707691288 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68013127837 2.71678728327 99% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 139.433497537 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553797468354 0.580463131201 95% => OK
syllable_count: 502.2 379.143842365 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.57093596059 102% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.71428571429 58% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 12.6551724138 119% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.1166856863 50.4703680194 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.0 104.977214359 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0666666667 20.9669160288 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.4 7.25397266985 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 6.9802955665 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.321195732018 0.242375264174 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114376155492 0.0925447433944 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112035734068 0.071462118173 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207489668211 0.151781067708 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0558775852913 0.0609392437508 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 12.6369458128 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.1260098522 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.9458128079 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 11.5310837438 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.32886699507 104% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 55.0591133005 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.94827586207 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.5123152709 86% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.