Share as much information as possible or limit them ? (discuss both views)

Some people believe that it is good to share as much information as possible in scientific research, business and the academic world.
Others believe that some information is too important or too valuable to share freely.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Any latest pieces of information discovered in the scientific, business and academic world is considered better to be widespread to the public while others hold the opinion that they should be kept in confidence or shared only with a price because of their value and importance. In my opinion, any discoveries in each field should be made known to the masses.

On the one hand, it goes without saying that the benefits of sharing will be enjoyed by the whole society, regardless of gender, race, religion and social status. If information is kept from being widespread, then the possible case is that only the elite and high profile people have the access to such precious and revolutionary breakthroughs. This may hold society back from making impressive strides towards the future as several pressing matters such as the ongoing plague, poor crop yields will not be timely tackled. For example, if the knowledge of the COVID-19 vaccine production had been maintained as a secret for profit-making, the mortality rate amongst those who unfortunately contracted this lethal virus would be much higher now.

On the other hand, however, the disclosure of invaluable news discovered to the masses in a country or even all around the world would be of a great sacrifice to the company, organization or individual who poured a lot of their efforts, money time to bring it into the light. We humans all have to accept that in order to research or invent something, to crystallize a business theory or to try a new pedagogical method can cost an astronomical price tag, a huge amount of time spent in researching, analysing, going through trials and errors, not to mention the mental fatigue caused by long hours of working as well as unwanted failures. Moreover, the huge profit they can amass through their work is so enticing and can assure them a better life as well as the resources to satisfy their passion for further creations.

Having said that, I believe there would be no big difference once their work is shared freely. Firstly, as long as it does good to society's well-being, there is no reason for the government to deny any petition for resources to conduct a new project. Secondly, the biggest happiness of an inventor who is really passionate about the job he is doing may not be derived from the money they will earn but how it can change the world for the better. Being recognized by a lot of people would be better than keep it to yourself and sell your work as a product. In this case, it means no more than a merchandise while if it can help people, it is invaluable and many people will remember you as, say, a hero.

In conclusion, the merits brought about by keeping new information confidentially are all eclipsed by those of sharing because of all the humanitarian reasons behind this act.

The opening sentence of the prompt restatement is confusing to read. It is stating the first information as a fact, which means there should not be an opposing idea presented in the same idea. A sentence is considered to be clear in its topic statement only when it contains one subject in the presentation. The author used 2 ideas in one sentence. Which is why the sentence structure became faulty and confusing in idea statement. Always present the opposing ideas as such. Refer to opposing sides using group pronouns to achieve this. Make sure that each sentence is understandable through single idea presentations. These sentences can be in the same paragraph, just make sure the presentation sentences are cohesively structured to better support the restatement.

The proper use of group pronouns in the discussion paragraphs are necessary to create the expected point of view reference points for the examiner. Without the group pronouns, the ideas become a general statement from the mind of the writer alone. That is not the purpose of this essay. Its purpose is to compare and contrast 3 points of view, 2 public, one personal. Without the proper pronoun usage, this becomes impossible for the task to achieve. Do not get me wrong, the reasons provided are sound and acceptably developed. The problem, is that a general presentation does not support the required discussion format for comparative essay writing in this task.