Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through large quantities of information and find what’s important.
Technically, the most crucial word that requires further definition here is what's 'important'. The idea of whether a viral video of a dancing monkey is more important than the Israel-Palestine conflict surely defines the statement in a negative way. Yet, for the sake of this discussion, let us assume that humanity indeed prioritizes importance over naked amusement when filtering information on a mass scale.
The existence of internet has changed the lives of billions of people indeed. More information is accessible right now about any convergent or divergent topic than it was a few decades ago. It is safe to assume that with this many things to see and this many things to do, there must be more distractions than ever. Studies in the near past and present have shown that people are less likely to focus on a single topic today as opposed to the day when books were the only source of viable information. Other benefits surely outweigh the con here, but the fact that this happens is undeniable.
Out of all the positivity that humanity gains from the age of mass media, like transparency, fast information, etc., the advantage pointed out here is a slightly controversial one. Let us look at it from two perspectives. First, let us look at a case where one is looking for specific information for a project, let's say, on ecosystem balance in the world. Merely typing the words in any established search engine is the first way to go, almost half the population knows it. What it generates is a huge list of information from different sources. Anyone who has done this before has had to deal with the vast information and will scan for a suitable review article. Although it is true that the search results are tailored using other 'tricks' programmers have up their sleeves, technically, it is true that they can sort through the large quantity of information to find what they need.
Secondly, let us look at a scenario where someone is not looking for something specific, but is scanning through the online news portal for a daily check. The big issue here is that the majority of the information that might and probably will catch this person's eyes are the ones that they are emotionally attached to. Another possibility is focusing on what other people think are important, for example the latest viral videos that media posts for a higher TRP. I am not sure if this can be considered as filtering what's important, provided that global warming is drowning a portion of the earth's surface every day and a lion's share of the people are not even thinking about it.
In summary, maybe human beings are getting better at filtering what they want at the moment, but surely they are not building the inherent ability to find out what's important. If what's important is what they want, sure, I can accept the argument; this however cannot be the only definition since with the power of internet and mass media, comes the responsibility of saving the Earth.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-17 | srujanakeerthi | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-15 | Chayank_11 | 33 | view |
| 2019-12-05 | Opak Pulu | 50 | view |
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 50
- All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. 66
- Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through lar 83
- Pirouettes Ballet School is the clear choice for any child. Of all the dance schools in Elmtown, Pirouettes has the most intensive program, and our teachers have danced in the most prestigious ballet companies all over the world. Many of our students have 69
- Some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education. Others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 77, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...hat requires further definition here is whats important. The idea of whether a viral ...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 230, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a negative way" with adverb for "negative"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...e conflict surely defines the statement in a negative way. Yet, for the sake of this discussion, ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 250, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...tion that might and probably will catch this persons eyes are the ones that they are...
^^^^
Line 13, column 518, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
... if this can be considered as filtering whats important, provided that global warming...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 160, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...ilding the inherent ability to find out whats important. If whats important is what t...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 180, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...ability to find out whats important. If whats important is what they want, sure, I ca...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, for example, in summary, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 33.0505617978 127% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2467.0 2235.4752809 110% => OK
No of words: 511.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82778864971 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75450408675 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6628751786 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 277.0 215.323595506 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542074363992 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 781.2 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.0449524957 60.3974514979 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.476190476 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42857142857 5.21951772744 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189122010434 0.243740707755 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0513595136064 0.0831039109588 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0379269007684 0.0758088955206 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102990103249 0.150359130593 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0333446433726 0.0667264976115 50% => 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: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.8420337079 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.03 12.1639044944 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 100.480337079 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.