5,975 views
0 votes
0 votes

Nhờ mọi người sửa và góp ý hộ mình bài này. Mình đang học lấy band 5 writing. Mình cảm ơn nhiều

 

Some hold the view that ideas and information should be completely  open, and there should be no controls on what people can read and watch in the media (TV, newspapers, internet).

Do you agree with this view, or do you think that in some circumstances governments should limit the freedom of the media?

Nowadays, it is no doubt that the media is playing an important role in providing information. Thanks to the increasing advance of the internet, people can access to a huge source of information by just a simple click. The idea of being able to read and watch freely in the media is becoming favored by many people. Personally, I tend to disagree with this viewpoint and in this essay I will give some examples to support my opinion.

Firstly, due to the fact that there are many viewers with different age ranges, it is important to have a limited age rating for television programs, as well as websites. Evidently, some channels or sites are considered to be harmful to children because of their violent and sexual themes. If people were allowed to watch everything on the screen, children might access to unsuitable contents.

What's more, it is common knowledge that the media is a double-edged sword. By surfing the net, people could find a lot of useful information. On the other hand, not every word comes from google is true. Being absolutely free to access the media also means facing a chaos of information including both truth and falsity.

However, there is a growing number of people argue that the media should not be controlled by governments. It is their view that the right to be informed is as essential as the basic human rights such as privacy or education. Moreover, avoiding some topics could raise the doubt about the government trying to hide serious issues from their citizens.

To sum up, the argument about how deeply people should be informed by the media is still ongoing with both sides holding strong beliefs. Some are fighting for a completely open media while others find it unnecessary. In my opinion, I believe that everything happens for a reason and a limited source of information is a way to protect us from many problems, such as misguidance and infobesity.                                  

by
0 points

Please log in or register to answer this question.

1 Answer

0 votes
0 votes

Nowadays, it is no (correct: without) doubt that the media is playing an important role in providing information. Thanks to the increasing advance (correct: advancement/ popularity) of the internet, people can access to a huge source of information by (correct: at) just  a simple click. The idea of being able to read and watch freely ("watch" is a transitive verb so it cannot be used in this way. Also, you can simplify the whole phrase as "freedom of access" ) in the media is becoming favored by many people. Personally, I tend to disagree with this viewpoint and in this essay I will give some examples to support my opinion.

Firstly, due to the fact that there are many viewers with different age ranges (correct: belonging to different age ranges/ brackets), it is important to have a limited age rating (correct: an age rating/ limit) for television programs, as well as websites. Evidently, some channels or sites are considered to be harmful to children because of their violent and sexual themes. If people were allowed to watch everything on the screen, children might access to (or, if you wish to avoid repetition, you could use the phrase "gain access to") unsuitable contents.

What's more, it is common knowledge that the media is a double-edged sword. By surfing the net, people could find a lot of useful information. On the other hand, not every word comes from google (correct: Google) is true. Being absolutely free to access the media also means facing a chaos (correct: hodgepodge/ farrago) of information including both truth and falsity.

However, there is a growing number of people argue (correct: who argue or arguing) that the media should not be controlled by governments. It is their view that the right to be informed is as essential as the basic human rights such as privacy or education. Moreover, avoiding some topics could raise the doubts about the government's trying to hide serious issues from their citizens.

To sum up, the argument about how deeply people should be informed by the media is still ongoing with both sides holding strong beliefs. Some are fighting for a completely open media while others find it unnecessary. In my opinion, I believe that everything happens for a reason and a limited source of information is a way to protect us from many problems, such as misguidance and infobesity.

--

Pros:

+ You make good use of vocabulary

+ Errors persist though not critically threaten the coherence of the essay

+ The essay bears a definite outline

Cons:

+ The language becomes colloquial at times

My score for you; 6.5

Good luck on the test :D

by
84 points

Related questions

0 votes
0 votes
1 answer
Nguyenducanh asked Aug 9, 2019
Nguyenducanh asked Aug 9, 2019
by Nguyenducanh
0 points
0 votes
0 votes
1 answer
0 votes
0 votes
1 answer
0 votes
0 votes
1 answer