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 | TOEFL IELTS GMAT GRE SAT ACT PTE ESL

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.

"Knowledge is power" goes the famous aphorism. In this digital age that we are living in, data is currency; whoever owns data - whether it is data about consumer habits, social media trends, or classified military information - automatically has an upper hand over the rest. It is hence logical that the general public would not want the government to have a monopoly over data; but I believe that, barring exceptional circumstances, political leaders might be correct in withholding sensitive information from the general public, for the following two reasons.
Firstly, much of our world operates in significant secrecy as a general strategy. In the event of a conflict, the element of surprise is often the best tactic for attaining victory. Take for example, the slaying of Osama Bin Laden by the US military. For years, the US had been trying to track down Laden but to no avail. It was only when the US military resorted to spying and infiltrating Laden's inner circle that they were able to locate him. It actually came as a surprise to the world when the US declared that they had brought about his downfall in the middle of the night. Clearly, keeping Laden's movements on a strict need-to-know basis is what led the military team to a smooth victory. Similarly, during the second World War, when the British had been successful in decoding Enigma - the clandestine communication technique employed by the German military - it was of utmost importance to keep it a secret. It was this tactic that helped the Allied forces counter German attacks, and end the war. Had the Germans got wind that Enigma had been decoded, they would have created another mechanism, and the British would have needed several years thereafter to decode it. Thus, it is reasonable for leaders to guard crucial information as it often ends up getting the job done.
Secondly, what is one man's trash could be another man's gold. To the layman, information, on paper, may look like just numbers and letters. However, to someone with the wrong intentions, it could be a treasure chest. For example, something as mundane as the shift timings of Customs officers on an airport or a harbor cannot remotely be interesting - unless that schedule falls into the hands of smugglers of illegal goods. Observing which officers are lenient or lazy in their work, and their shift timings, could make the smugglers' job downright easy. It is easy to see, then, why even seemingly trivial information must be safeguarded by leaders in office.
One could argue that transparency is a crucial aspect of the government's functioning, and one would be right. Consider for example, the unbridled expenditure that goes into election campaigning in most "democratic" nations like India. Bringing election spending under the jurisdiction of the Right to Information Act is an uphill battle that has been fought in vain. Isn't it a prerogative of the voters to know if a politician has received funding from any lobbyist groups before they decide to vote her or him into office? Or consider for instance, the recent reveal by Edward Snowden of the widespread monitoring of the American public by the NSA (National Security Agency). For years, the NSA secretly kept track on the day-to-day lives of ordinary citizens, under the guise of tracing terrorist activity. This was a clear violation of the right to privacy; and most would agree that when Snowden blew the whistle on these operations, he was in the right. While some of the political leaders involved may have justified this act as having been done in the interest of national security, there is no greater good than the upholding of individual constitutional rights.
In conclusion, there are instances where political leaders, in critical situations of national security and public safety, are justified in their decision of retaining sensitive information. But in no instance are they justified if doing so infringes upon the constitutional rights of the public.

Votes

This essay topic by users

Post date	Users	Rates	Link to Content
2023-11-04	sami18	60	view
2022-10-28	rohanj	83	view
2022-05-03	sunshaowei	50	view
2021-08-04	aneri07	83	view
2021-08-04	sameep21	50	view

>>> More users practiced this topic >>>

Essay Categories

GMAT/GRE Issue Task

Essays by user invisible_string :

>>> more essays by the user >>>

Write an essay by this topic

Comments

Essay evaluations by e-grader

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 316, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... the rest. It is hence logical that the general public would not want the government to have a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 527, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...hholding sensitive information from the general public, for the following two reasons. First...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 378, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: Isn't
...ll battle that has been fought in vain. Isnt it a prerogative of the voters to know ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 974, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... operations, he was in the right. While some of the political leaders involved may have jus...
^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, thus, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.5258426966 174% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 50.0 33.0505617978 151% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 88.0 58.6224719101 150% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3341.0 2235.4752809 149% => OK
No of words: 658.0 442.535393258 149% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07750759878 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.06473204393 4.55969084622 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86676095938 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 356.0 215.323595506 165% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.54103343465 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 1047.6 704.065955056 149% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 9.0 1.77640449438 507% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.3476788633 60.3974514979 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.366666667 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9333333333 23.4991977007 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.13333333333 5.21951772744 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186102901084 0.243740707755 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0403553889879 0.0831039109588 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0495218722325 0.0758088955206 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100300138966 0.150359130593 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0371314595032 0.0667264976115 56% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.1639044944 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 177.0 100.480337079 176% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.

Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.

Essay evaluations by e-grader

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, thus, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion

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