Social network
Social networking sites such as Facebook are thought by the vast majority of people to have had a detrimental effect on individuals as well as society and local communities. Nonetheless, in my opinion, while such sites are mainly beneficial to individuals, I agree that they have had a damaging effect on local communities.
On the one hand, the impact of online social media has had on individuals has clear advantages. Firstly, many people from different countries have been brought together through such sites such as Facebook and Zalo, whereas before the significant development of technology and social networking sites, people rarely had the chance to meet and communicate with anyone outside their immediate circle and communities. Secondly, Facebook also has social groups which offer numerous people an opportunity to meet and participate in discussions with other people who share common interests.
On the other hand, the effects that Facebook and online social media have had on society can be seen as negative. Rather than taking part in local communities, a number of people are instead choosing to take more interests in the virtual world. Consequently, these people may no longer be interested in forming close and supportive relationships. Furthermore, the society as a whole can become disjointed and fragmented if more and more people spend more time with people who they have not met face to face and who they are unlikely to ever meet in the future.
To conclude, although social networking sites have brought individuals closer, they have not had the same effect on society and social communities. Therefore, local communities should make efforts to involve local people in local activities, in order to promote social interaction between them.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-07-31 | trpg143 | view | |
| 2024-07-31 | trpg143 | view | |
| 2024-03-18 | nguyendangquang.aspect | 84 | view |
| 2024-03-10 | hoaithuongnguyen283 | 89 | view |
| 2024-02-24 | hoaithuongnguyen283 | 89 | view |
- foreign language 73
- The graph below shows the rate of smoking per 1000 people in Someland from 1960 to 2000. 61
- The graph below shows the rate of smoking per 1000 people in Someland from 1960 to 2000. 73
- The line graph below shows the changes in amount in type of fast food consumed bu Australian teenagers from 1975 to 200. 73
- The graph below shows the rate of smoking per 1000 people in Someland from 1960 to 2000. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 296, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...romote social interaction between them.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, whereas, while, such as, as well as, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1497.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 281.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32740213523 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87853063696 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 176.041082164 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523131672598 0.561755894193 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 483.3 506.74238477 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.5471894265 49.4020404114 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.090909091 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5454545455 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 16.2727272727 7.06120827912 230% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.231609500913 0.244688304435 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106687979566 0.084324248473 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107940296079 0.0667982634062 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175549415711 0.151304729494 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.097332157091 0.056905535591 171% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 13.0946893788 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 78.4519038076 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.78957915832 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.