Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
This topic raises the controversial issue of the utility and importance of scandals as a tool for gathering the attention of the masses on various overlooked problems. Indisputably, a scandal has a very high probability of becoming the headline and hot topic of discussion. Nevertheless, the utility of scandals for raising awareness on important and grave topics present in the society is questionable due to the distracting sensationalism attributed with them. Thus, I disagree with the author and argue that due to the fickle nature of scandals, they are not useful to focus on problems that cannot are precarious to tackle.
First of all, scandals cannot consistently be attributed as useful. The bombastic nature of scandals tends to make any issue grander than it really is. Due to this, scandals generally have a disruptive effect on the media and general public opinion and can cause instability. For example, scandals related to Hollywood celebrities are inconsequential. When scandalous news about a particular famous individual is released, the recipients of this information get distracted or side-tracked from their original commitments. Consequently, scandals tend to be more of a distraction than a useful piece of information.
Furthermore, the authenticity of a scandal is always a matter of grave importance. However, the general public is quick to react to such scandals without verifying the actual truth. In such cases, the damage to the reputation of the person/company/idea is already irreversibly done. Also, there are many means of attaining focus on volatile issues. For example, social media is a powerful platform where every contributor acts as a leader, a speaker, and a reformer. In addition, scandals tend to be short lived and the general public loose interest from scandalous pieces of news as quickly as their attention is captured.
Admittedly, the sensationalistic quality of scandals does manage to capture the focus of a very large audience extremely effectively. This ensures maximum impact in a very small time frame. For genuine issues that cannot be tackled by general debate and discussions, scandals provide a powerful alternative. However, the argument above does not constitute a sufficient support to claim that scandals are useful. The reputation of scandals as ballyhoo prevents them to be taken in a serious fashion. Scandals have a very niche application for touchy subjects where individually speaking up may not be an option.
In conclusion, although scandals provide an excellent source for eye-catching headlines and help address issues with dangerous ramifications, they also tend to veer off in irrelevant directions. As long as the lurid news is verified at source for authenticity and speakers and reformers have the gall to speak about topics that people generally shy away from, a balance can be attained where scandals do not hold a pivotal role in capturing focus. In fact, with the emergence of social media and active participation of the general public, people have started voicing opinions fearlessly and hence helped in reducing the dependence on scandalous tactics applied by the media powerhouses.
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner."Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central 50
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner."Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central 86
- The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal."A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situ 68
- Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archa 66
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoni 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 227, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ve a disruptive effect on the media and general public opinion and can cause instability. For ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 97, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...atter of grave importance. However, the general public is quick to react to such scandals with...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 521, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...scandals tend to be short lived and the general public loose interest from scandalous pieces o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 478, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a serious fashion" with adverb for "serious"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...s as ballyhoo prevents them to be taken in a serious fashion. Scandals have a very niche application...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 525, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...l media and active participation of the general public, people have started voicing opinions f...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'consequently', 'first', 'furthermore', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'nevertheless', 'really', 'so', 'then', 'thus', 'for example', 'in addition', 'in conclusion', 'in fact', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.24 0.240241500013 100% => OK
Verbs: 0.149090909091 0.157235817809 95% => OK
Adjectives: 0.114545454545 0.0880659088768 130% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0654545454545 0.0497285424764 132% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0145454545455 0.0444667217837 33% => OK
Prepositions: 0.127272727273 0.12292977631 104% => OK
Participles: 0.0472727272727 0.0406280797675 116% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.18687502848 2.79330140395 114% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0309090909091 0.030933414821 100% => OK
Particles: 0.00363636363636 0.0016655270985 218% => OK
Determiners: 0.109090909091 0.0997080785238 109% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0109090909091 0.0249443105267 44% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0145454545455 0.0148568991511 98% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3178.0 2732.02544248 116% => OK
No of words: 497.0 452.878318584 110% => OK
Chars per words: 6.39436619718 6.0361032391 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72159896747 4.58838876751 103% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.424547283702 0.366273622748 116% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.340040241449 0.280924506359 121% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.253521126761 0.200843997647 126% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.164989939638 0.132149295362 125% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18687502848 2.79330140395 114% => OK
Unique words: 265.0 219.290929204 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533199195171 0.48968727796 109% => OK
Word variations: 64.3503458405 55.4138127331 116% => OK
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6194690265 121% => OK
Sentence length: 19.88 23.380412469 85% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.0651284451 59.4972553346 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.12 141.124799967 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.88 23.380412469 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.8 0.674092028746 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.21349557522 96% => OK
Readability: 53.8840241449 51.4728631049 105% => OK
Elegance: 1.80952380952 1.64882698954 110% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.315571535208 0.391690518653 81% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0799789067428 0.123202303941 65% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0584476837419 0.077325440228 76% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.489523870062 0.547984918172 89% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.134696387689 0.149214159877 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116029832418 0.161403998019 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0612220048825 0.0892212321368 69% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.393708501938 0.385218514788 102% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0496127015272 0.0692045440612 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.223250461975 0.275328986314 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0419528401269 0.0653680567796 64% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 10.4325221239 29% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 20.0 5.30420353982 377% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88274336283 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 3.0 7.22455752212 42% => OK
Negative topic words: 19.0 3.66592920354 518% => Less negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.70907079646 74% => OK
Total topic words: 24.0 13.5995575221 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.