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.
The right to information is a topic that has been subject to numerous intense debates over time. However, this debate has no universal solution that can apply across all scenarios- although the public has the right to know the truth, however, a few topics need to be withheld from the knowledge of the general public, for their own well-being.
The most popular argument given to support the idea of full public disclosure is that it helps in the decision making process of the people, especially in the case of a democracy, where people choose their leaders based on information. In this case, the public should indeed be given all the information that pertains to the election process and be made aware of all the details about the potential candidates contesting the elections. Here, the non-disclosure of information by the political candidates is against the spirit of democracy, and is principally wrong. However, the leaders should not be compelled to share information about the nation’s security and other confidential knowledge that may cause any damage to the security of the nation or its denizens. For example, any criminal/legal charges against any politician should be declared to the public. However, military or other sensitive research related content that can be a potential threat to the nation in the hands of an enemy should definitely be withheld, and preserved with great care.
Another concern against the notion of disclosing everything to the people, is that in case of sensitive issues, there is a high risk of mass hysteria and panic, which only tend to make any situation worse. A better solution in this case would be to mitigate the problem before making it known to the public. For example, in case of an impending attack from an enemy, the country’s leaders should try to ameliorate the situation through negotiations or counter-attacks, before announcing anything in front of the public. However, in case the situation can be made better by involving the public, all the information should be broadcasted to ensure that everyone is well aware. A good example would be the case of the corona virus Covid-19. In this case, any censorship of information by the government would have accelerated the spread of the virus.
Hence, in most cases, it is vital for the public to be made aware of all the happenings that can/may affect them, except for sensitive/vital information that may be required for the security of the country. In this way, the spirit of democracy can be preserved, while ensuring the safety of the people.
- The following recommendation appeared in a memo from the mayor of the town of Hopewell Two years ago the nearby town of Ocean View built a new municipal golf course and resort hotel During the past two years tourism in Ocean View has increased new busines 60
- The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin a medicine used to treat headaches Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates for t 50
- 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 50
- The following appeared in a memo from the new vice president of Sartorian a company that manufactures men s clothing Five years ago at a time when we had difficulties in obtaining reliable supplies of high quality wool fabric we discontinued production of 50
- Prompt Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reas 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 303, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...o be withheld from the knowledge of the general public, for their own well-being. The most po...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, however, may, so, well, while, except for, for example, in most cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 58.6224719101 114% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2140.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 425.0 442.535393258 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03529411765 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54043259262 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85775918217 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 215.323595506 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.468235294118 0.4932671777 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 685.8 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.7323769106 60.3974514979 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.75 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5625 23.4991977007 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.75 5.21951772744 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221379344306 0.243740707755 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.078023966297 0.0831039109588 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0330482989556 0.0758088955206 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142610893524 0.150359130593 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0144285640601 0.0667264976115 22% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 100.480337079 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 11.8971910112 155% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.