Heroes are the glues of a community. Citizens look up to their heroes, especially in times of distress, to gain insight and survive. For the very same reason, heroism can also be misused for gain influence and personal gain. Media should be looked at as a checkpoint which filters out the unscrupulous heroes. If a hero is a real hero, then no scrutiny can damage it.
Media scrutiny is, for the most part, innocuous. A robust competitive media industry can lead to transparency and unfolding the truth about a supposedly heroic act. For example, a businessman can donate charities and represent him, or herself as a philanthropist who cares about his community. While this gesture might look very innocent and munificent, it can also serve as a mean to personal gain for that businessman. Be it through tax breaks, or to cover up other wrongdoings that he/she might have done. An investigation by media, whatever the motivation is, can reveal this. Therefore, media should scrutinize any heroic claim, with its utmost power, to betray any ill-will.
On the other hand, a hero becomes a hero not because of the media, but because of their magnanimous personality, their largess, or their care for others. The media should be treated as a checkpoint that filters out the unscrupulous individuals who are looking for personal gain when conducting philanthropic acts. Even if the media ruthlessly tried to spread acrimony about a person, the society can always distinguish between an honest generosity and a dishonest deceit.
While media scrutiny is a blessing, it can also serve against its purpose. For example, if a certain company, or government had monopoly over the media industry in a country, then it can manipulate the general view of the society towards an individual, not due to lack of merit of that individual, but due to having an interest in doing so. While this issue is certainly possible, it is a result of lack of competition, not the concept of having an investigative media itself.
Overall, media scrutiny is a blessing for a healthy society. Without it, fake heroes can easily deceive the citizens for their personal gains, and the resulting venality can subsume the real heroes as well.
- Recent incursions by deep-sea fisherman into the habitat of the Madagascan shrimp have led to a significant reduction in the species population. With the breeding season fast approaching, the number of shrimp should soon begin to increase. Nonetheless, th 62
- Claim: When planning courses, educators should take into account the interests and suggestions of their students.Reason: Students are more motivated to learn when they are interested in what they are studying.Write a response in which you discuss the exte 50
- The best leaders are those who encourage feedback from the people whom they lead. 50
- When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you 79
- Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing 58
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'if', 'look', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'well', 'while', 'for example', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.235154394299 0.240241500013 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.118764845606 0.157235817809 76% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0783847980998 0.0880659088768 89% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0498812351544 0.0497285424764 100% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0427553444181 0.0444667217837 96% => OK
Prepositions: 0.116389548694 0.12292977631 95% => OK
Participles: 0.0261282660333 0.0406280797675 64% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.86280522598 2.79330140395 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.021377672209 0.030933414821 69% => OK
Particles: 0.00712589073634 0.0016655270985 428% => OK
Determiners: 0.12351543943 0.0997080785238 124% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0380047505938 0.0249443105267 152% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0142517814727 0.0148568991511 96% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2216.0 2732.02544248 81% => OK
No of words: 370.0 452.878318584 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.98918918919 6.0361032391 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.58838876751 96% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.362162162162 0.366273622748 99% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.286486486486 0.280924506359 102% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.197297297297 0.200843997647 98% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.121621621622 0.132149295362 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86280522598 2.79330140395 102% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 219.290929204 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.527027027027 0.48968727796 108% => OK
Word variations: 57.5030062724 55.4138127331 104% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6194690265 97% => OK
Sentence length: 18.5 23.380412469 79% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.2018310219 59.4972553346 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.8 141.124799967 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5 23.380412469 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.55 0.674092028746 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.21349557522 0% => OK
Readability: 47.1486486486 51.4728631049 92% => OK
Elegance: 1.78651685393 1.64882698954 108% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.388916413106 0.391690518653 99% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0840727810334 0.123202303941 68% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0713289511976 0.077325440228 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.471029044022 0.547984918172 86% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.154010722609 0.149214159877 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13843240734 0.161403998019 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0478761746669 0.0892212321368 54% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.280165295845 0.385218514788 73% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0331116875211 0.0692045440612 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.244401892412 0.275328986314 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368855197238 0.0653680567796 56% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.4325221239 153% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.30420353982 38% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88274336283 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 12.0 7.22455752212 166% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 3.66592920354 55% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 15.0 13.5995575221 110% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.