Some people suggest that social networking and online communication have increased social isolation. In what ways do you think this has happened? Give reasons for your answers and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience.
In recent years the use of social networking has grown beyond recognition, bringing new set of concerns with it. Most young people now text regular;y and are familiar with a variety of other platforms used for communication, such as Telegram and instant messaging. It has never been easier to keep in touch with family and friends wherever they are in the world. Despite this, however, there is evidence that social isolation is rising and not decreasing. I therefore agree that rather than helping people communicate, technology has actually weakened social bonds. I will attempt to outline some key reasons for this.
Firstly and most obviously, if people are using tablets, phones or other devices, they are focused in the technology rather than what is happening around them. While this might help us keep in touch with people who are far way from us, often it means that the user forgets those in their vicinity. For example, it is now common to see people in restaurants and cafes all looking at their phones instead of speaking to each other. Secondly, although using social networks might seem a good solution for someone who is shy or worried about meeting others, ironically it is more likely to keep them at home. In fact, if people didn't have that option they would have to go out and meet real friends, which is a much healthier way to deal with being lonely. There are reports of people who rarely leave their houses because they are addicted to an 'online existence' and young people who become aggressive when their parents tell them to come offline.
Finally, even if people do meet online friends, these friendships are often not really what they seem. Unfortunately, there have been several reports of people being harmed by someone they believed was a friend. This is because the internet allows us to disguise who we really are. As honesty is key to a good relationship, clearly this is not a good basis to meet friends.
In conclusion, I would argue that while the internet can help with quick and convenient communication for business or travel, or when people live in distant places, for a number of reasons it has not increased social cohesion overall.
- The charts below show the number of visitors arriving in a particular country for a short trip and the number of residents leaving that country for a short trip from 2009 to 2011
- The bar chart below gives information about vehicle ownerships in China. Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information. 61
- The diagram shows how instant noodles are manufactured 78
- The chart below shows what Anthropology graduates from one university did after finishing their undergraduate degree course The table shows the salaries of the anthropologists in work after five years
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981 1991 and 2001 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 624, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...o keep them at home. In fact, if people didnt have that option they would have to go ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, firstly, however, if, look, really, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 13.1623246493 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 24.0651302605 158% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 373.0 315.596192385 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.8418230563 5.12529762239 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39467950092 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50129881664 2.80592935109 89% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563002680965 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 558.9 506.74238477 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.5991760595 49.4020404114 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.235294118 106.682146367 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9411764706 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.58823529412 7.06120827912 122% => OK
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 : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.219209676689 0.244688304435 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0708605863631 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0407299738962 0.0667982634062 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136321594249 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0259554299639 0.056905535591 46% => 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: 12.3 13.0946893788 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 50.2224549098 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 12.4159519038 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.58950901804 97% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.