IELTS Writing Task 2 – Some people think that media should not report detail of crimes to the public
Some people think that media should not report detail of crimes to the public.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Same Topic –
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
You should write at least 250 words.
IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay Sample
Sample Answer 1:
Nowadays, we are surrounded by a variety of media like the Internet, newspaper and TV,
which are very informative, connecting us to the whole world. It is a highly debatable issue
whether media should report smallest details of crime to the masses or not. I feel that the
media should be very judicious in selecting what to report and how much to report. So, I
agree with the statement. In this essay, I intend to support my views with my arguments.
As I see it, the news outlets should pay more attention to the affairs themselves, rather than
the details of the crimes. To start with, the details of crimes make a misleading statement to
the children and adolescents who are curious about the process of committing crimes, and
are likely to copy the criminal actions blindly. Moreover, the excessive violence and
pornographic contents can also raise the adults’ criminal tendencies. In the other words,
detailed crime news can generate individuals’ potential desire to commit a crime, thus
induce many social problems.
Moreover, the detailed report of a crime does not show enough respects to the victims and
their family. For example, if any murder or robbery has taken place in someone’s house
then if it is shown in detail on TV, the whole privacy of those people is lost. Another very
strong argument in favour of censorship of media is that sometimes this detailed
description can help the criminals also. For instance, when terrorists attacked Hotel Taj in
Mumbai, the media reported details of the commandos’ position on TV. This was also
viewed by the terrorists hiding in the hotel. They changed their positions accordingly.
However, the opponents claim that we have a right to know every detail and so media
should report every detail. I still feel that it would lead to more problems. I think the media
has an obligation to show the right direction to the public. It should report news in a
balanced manner rather than high-lighting the details of the crime.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that although it is the duty of the media to keep us
informed, the details of crime should not be shown.
Model Answer 2:
In contemporary society, we are surrounded by varieties of media like Internet, newspaper and TV program, which are current and informative, connecting us to the worldwide area. In the meanwhile, the medias also spark much debate because of negative influences. For instance, the news about criminal acts which are reported in graphic details, misleading people to commit crimes.
As I see it, the news outlets should pay more attention to the affairs themselves rather than the details of the crimes. To start with, the details of crimes make a misleading statement to the children and adolescents who are curious about the process of commit crimes, are likely to copy the criminal actions blindly. Moreover, the excessive violent and pornographic contents can also raise the adults’ criminal rates. In the other words, detailed crime news can generate individuals’ potential desire to commit a crime, thus induce many social problems. Last but not least, the detailed report of a crime does not show enough respects to the victims and their family.
Even so, the reports with criminal details maybe bring a well-looking audience rating, because of the individuals’ curiosity. However, the press should play a key role as the justicial direction of public opinion. Regarding of responsibility, the code of ethics is the basis of the whole press, including journalism and electronic media.
Overall, i think the media have obligation to show a right direction for the public. It should report news objective and balance, rather than highlight the details of the crime.
Model Answer 3:
The media has long reported crime. The right of the media to do this is rarely disputed, but the way in which it does this often comes under criticism. One issue that has been discussed a lot recently is the amount of detail that should be publicised.
Those who believe that as many details as possible should be published point out the demand for such information of the public and the freedom of information. Many members of the public believe that the more information they have, the better they can protect themselves from criminals. Those who believe in the maximum possible freedom of information think that it is people’s right to be told as much as possible.
I believe that the first assertion may be correct, but that the second one is not. There are two main reasons why the media should not be given many details of crimes. The first is that it may alert the criminal to what the police know and do not know. This could allow the criminal to adjust his/her behaviour and avoid detection or capture. The second reason is that giving the media certain details could cause difficulties for the victim, his/her friends and family, and any witnesses. If you were a witness against a particularly violent gang, you certainly wouldn’t want your name and address publicised.
To conclude, I believe that the police should control the amount of information given to the media and that victims of, and witnesses to, crimes should think carefully when talking to the media. This is not to say that crimes should not be reported, only that there is insufficient reason for many details to be reported.
Model Answer 4:
It is true that many governments have persuaded industries and businesses to relocate to the suburban areas. While this trend may have several drawbacks, I personally believe that its benefits are greater.
Admittedly, moving industries and businesses to regional areas is problematic up to a point. Firstly, not all the workers are willing to leave their family to resettle in rural areas. Besides, local workers are often unqualified and thus, in need of training courses. Consequently, companies are likely to find themselves lacking in skilled workforce in the short term. Secondly, poor infrastructure in remote areas can make the idea of moving industries’ location less attractive.
However, the relocation of factories and companies, without a doubt, may partially help solve many urban problems and improve general living standards. These movements definitely lead to the flow of workers to less dense areas which subsequently lessens the burden on public infrastructure in major cities. As a result, traffic congestion, hospital and school overload are alleviated and people can enjoy a better life.
Another significant advantage is the decrease in production cost. More specifically, factory owners can make use of abundant raw materials in the countryside which often require little or no transportation costs. In addition to that, rental costs in less populous places are considerably lower than that in densely populated cities. Eventually, the cost of production becomes lower, making the final products more competitive.
In conclusion, despite a number of shortcomings, it seems to me that the change in the location of industries and businesses from large cities to rural areas is more beneficial.
Model Answer 5:
Recently, there has been a growing concern over the trend of mass media reporting crimes with too much detail. Some people have made criminal documentaries in the newspapers and on television a scapegoat for the increased rate of illegal activities. Because of that, there have been calls for the government to impose restrictions on descriptions of crimes which could adversely impact the society. The author supports this stance because of the following reasons.
First of all, there is empirical evidence and academic research which proves that newspapers and television can greatly affect their viewers’ behaviors. Equipped with massive exposure to the public, these media channels are capable of shaping the attitude of the audiences toward certain topics, including crimes. Unfortunately, in the pursuit of profit, the mass media often dramatize criminal incidents to attract more popularity, which, in turn, desensitizes the public to the horrors of serious crimes, such as homicide. In the long term, this phenomenon will make people become indifferent in curbing crimes as well as heartless to its victims.
Furthermore, the ubiquity of criminal stories in the newspapers and on television has contributed to a conducive environment for prospective lawbreakers to emulate serious offenses of previous wrongdoers. By broadcasting such detailed description of illegal acts, the media has served as a source of training for soon-to-be criminals. Because of that, overly-specific disclosure of crime acts by the media regularly comes under fire for arguably being culprit for the prevalence of unlawful activities, in terms of quantity, complexity and seriousness.
As suggested above, media violence, including the detailed picturing of violent acts, contributes at least partly to social violence and the audience’s insensitive behavior. Therefore, the government should limit the ability of media channels in reporting crimes, by censorship, for example.
Get More Sample Answer – Writing Task 2
Submit your Essay here in the comment section, we will add your essay in our post.
(Collected, Source – Book, Internet)
