Nowadays, it is commonly accepted that a lot of movies and television programs that targeted young audiences are contained harmful and weak materials that can threatened culture condition in future. Contrary, to this popular belief there are still those who argue that most television programs are contained helpful materials and critics exaggerate the problem. I, to a great extent, agree with this idea that movies and television programs have more negative effects than positive effects on the way young people behave.
First and foremost, filmmakers, in order to attract more audiences, choose subjects that can attract young people attending. It is obvious that young people attract to subjects that are more exciting, thus the movies with high physical activities are remarkably popular among them. But a lot of times the directors go out of the frame and use a lot of violent behaviours and meaning in their films. The psychologist substantiated that this kind of movies in the long term can affect people behaviour, through undirectly teaching of violence.
Another significant fact that should be taken into consideration is that sometimes the television is under influence of different groups that try to use from television as a tool for their own benefits unless its harmful or useful effect on people life. For example, last month I watched a documentary that really surprised me. It was about cigaret industries policies during the 1970s years. At these times the tobacco companies were preventing from transmitting news about negative effects of cigarets on people healthy, they even had an influence on the government to a limited budget for research in this field. In addition, these times were the peak time of television advertisement for use of cigaret. For example, the use of celebrities to advertise that people who use cigaret are the coolest and high prestige person in society.
On the basis of reasons that mentioned above, I am convinced that movies and television programs are a more negative effect on young people than positive effects. In order to attract more viewers, and under influence of powerful investments to make more profits.
- For success in a future job, the ability to relate well to people is more important than studying hard in school. 73
- TPO-54 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Teachers should not make their social or political views known to students in the classroom. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 81
- T P O 53 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Television advertising directed toward young children (aged two to five) should not be allowed. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 189, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...s that can threatened culture condition in future. Contrary, to this popular belief there...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, really, so, still, thus, for example, in addition, kind of, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 9.8082437276 41% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.0286738351 163% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 43.0788530466 79% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1824.0 1977.66487455 92% => OK
No of words: 349.0 407.700716846 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22636103152 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.48103885553 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74647775158 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 212.727598566 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.530085959885 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 576.9 618.680645161 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6003584229 73% => 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: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.3675210831 48.9658058833 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.6 100.406767564 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2666666667 20.6045352989 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 5.45110844103 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.284753780363 0.236089414692 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0982838468558 0.076458572812 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.162283585052 0.0737576698707 220% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201462398635 0.150856017488 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.126537361789 0.0645574589148 196% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 11.7677419355 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 58.1214874552 68% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 10.9000537634 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 86.8835125448 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.002688172 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.247311828 137% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.