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?

In the last few decades, with the widespread use of the media, there has been an argument about whether information in every shape and form should be accessed freely without government intervention. I am completely against the idea of allowing people to approach whatever is posted, broadcasted, or published. In this essay, I am going to give reasons to support my own view on this topic.
First and foremost, access restrictions in certain situations are possible to reduce the threat of cybercriminals. For example, the set boundaries on the Internet, which is called the 'Firewall', protect people from entering websites containing toxic codes which are deliberately made by hackers to steal innocents' identities to serve their ill intentions. Moreover, people who are often exposed to detrimental content such as gambling, assault, and harassment can easily be affected mentally and eventually soak in crime. Take the Chessboard Killer as an example. He was a murderer who had committed more than 50 criminal cases in Russia and faced life imprisonment after being arrested. He admitted that his appalling crime had been inspired by reading articles about another notorious murderer when he was at a tender age.
Furthermore, governments can prevent enemies' schemes by restriction accessing the media. By having a grasp of the information, the ill content posted by the reactionaries can not go mainstream to affect civilians' ideology. In many cases, the leader of a reactionary organisation named Viet Tan was arrested timely after posting on the Internet and publishing newspapers to promote his negative ideas that provoked people to go against the government. Therefore, there was no strike or violence took place in the meantime, the government was able to keep its subjects safe and sound from any further harm that could be caused supposing the scheme was successful.
By the way of a conclusion, my opinion is that the restriction of freedom of the media is not a deprivation of liberty but rather a shield to protect civilians from possible threats and danger from being exposed to toxic content. Governments should strictly keep ideas and information under control to maintain social stable and peaceful life of people.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"In the last few decades" -> "Over the past few decades"
Explanation: "Over the past few decades" is a more formal and precise temporal reference, enhancing the academic tone of the essay.
"there has been an argument about" -> "there has been debate about"
Explanation: "There has been debate about" is a more formal and precise way to express ongoing discussion or controversy, fitting better in an academic context.
"information in every shape and form" -> "information in all forms"
Explanation: "In all forms" is a more concise and formal expression, avoiding the colloquial tone of "every shape and form."
"allowing people to approach whatever is posted, broadcasted, or published" -> "allowing unrestricted access to all published content"
Explanation: "Unrestricted access to all published content" is more precise and formal, avoiding the awkward phrasing and colloquial tone of "approach whatever is posted, broadcasted, or published."
"possible to reduce the threat of cybercriminals" -> "capable of reducing the threat of cybercriminals"
Explanation: "Capable of reducing" is more formal and precise than "possible to reduce," aligning better with academic style.
"the set boundaries on the Internet, which is called the ‘Firewall’" -> "the Internet’s firewalls"
Explanation: "The Internet’s firewalls" is a more direct and formal way to refer to the security measures, avoiding the awkward construction of "the set boundaries on the Internet, which is called the ‘Firewall’."
"toxic codes which are deliberately made by hackers" -> "malicious codes deliberately created by hackers"
Explanation: "Malicious codes deliberately created by hackers" is a more precise and formal way to describe the intent and nature of the codes, enhancing the academic tone.
"soak in crime" -> "become involved in criminal activities"
Explanation: "Become involved in criminal activities" is a more formal and precise alternative to the colloquial "soak in crime," which is inappropriate for academic writing.
"the Chessboard Killer" -> "the Chessboard Killer case"
Explanation: Adding "case" after "the Chessboard Killer" clarifies that it refers to a specific instance or example, which is more appropriate in an academic context.
"faced life imprisonment" -> "received a life sentence"
Explanation: "Received a life sentence" is a more formal and precise term, commonly used in legal and academic contexts.
"restriction accessing the media" -> "restriction on accessing the media"
Explanation: "Restriction on accessing the media" corrects the grammatical error and clarifies the meaning, aligning with formal English usage.
"the ill content posted by the reactionaries" -> "the harmful content disseminated by reactionary groups"
Explanation: "Harmful content disseminated by reactionary groups" is more precise and formal, avoiding the vague and colloquial "ill content posted by the reactionaries."
"there was no strike or violence took place" -> "no strikes or violence occurred"
Explanation: "No strikes or violence occurred" corrects the grammatical error and uses a more formal structure, enhancing the academic tone.
"By the way of a conclusion" -> "In conclusion"
Explanation: "In conclusion" is the standard phrase used to introduce the final part of an essay, replacing the awkward and informal "By the way of a conclusion."
"social stable and peaceful life" -> "social stability and peaceful lives"
Explanation: "Social stability and peaceful lives" corrects the grammatical error and uses more precise terms, enhancing the formality and clarity of the conclusion.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay adequately addresses both perspectives presented in the prompt: the argument for complete openness versus the argument for government control of media content. It discusses reasons supporting government intervention with examples such as cybersecurity threats and prevention of harmful content dissemination.
- How to improve: To enhance task response, the essay could benefit from a deeper exploration of the opposing viewpoint advocating for unrestricted access to information. This would provide a more balanced argument and demonstrate a thorough consideration of both sides before concluding with a clear stance.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear stance throughout, firmly advocating for government restrictions on media content to protect the public from harm. Examples such as cyber threats and the prevention of criminal behavior through media exposure support this position.
- How to improve: To further strengthen clarity, the essay should ensure that every paragraph directly relates to supporting this main position. Additionally, explicitly linking each example back to the main argument would reinforce coherence and clarity.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas clearly but could benefit from further development and elaboration. For instance, while it provides examples of cyber threats and criminal behavior influenced by media, these could be more extensively developed with deeper analysis or additional examples.
- How to improve: To improve, the essay should aim for a more nuanced exploration of each idea presented. This could involve expanding on the implications of media control for societal stability or discussing potential drawbacks of excessive government intervention.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic by discussing the advantages of government control over media content, such as preventing cyber threats and criminal behavior. However, it occasionally strays into examples that are less directly related to the main argument, such as the example of the Chessboard Killer.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the essay should ensure that all examples and arguments directly support the central thesis of government regulation of media. Avoiding tangential examples and maintaining a clear connection to the prompt’s themes would strengthen coherence.

Overall, while the essay effectively argues for government regulation of media to protect public safety, it would benefit from a more balanced consideration of opposing views and deeper development of its examples. Ensuring a more focused structure and stronger ties between examples and the main argument would enhance coherence and overall effectiveness.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a generally clear organization of ideas. It begins with an introduction that outlines the author’s stance on media freedom and follows a structured approach through examples and arguments in the body paragraphs. Each paragraph discusses a distinct point (cybersecurity, societal impact, and national security), which aids in clarity and progression of ideas.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider strengthening the connection between paragraphs. For instance, transitioning more explicitly between the reasons presented (cybersecurity concerns, societal impact, national security) could create a smoother progression of arguments. Additionally, ensure each paragraph’s topic sentence clearly links back to the thesis statement to maintain focus throughout.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs effectively to structure different aspects of the argument. Each paragraph introduces a new idea or expands on a previously mentioned point. There is a clear attempt at topic sentences, although some paragraphs could benefit from more explicit topic sentence development to better guide the reader.
- How to improve: Work on refining topic sentences to succinctly preview the main idea of each paragraph. For example, in the paragraph discussing societal impact, ensure the topic sentence explicitly connects the discussion back to the broader theme of media regulation. This clarity will assist in maintaining coherence and guiding the reader through the essay’s argumentative structure.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs cohesive devices such as pronouns (e.g., "he," "his," "they"), transitional phrases (e.g., "first and foremost," "furthermore," "by the way of conclusion"), and repetition of key terms ("media," "government," "restrictions"). These devices generally aid in linking ideas and maintaining coherence.
- How to improve: While cohesive devices are used, diversifying their types and frequency could further enhance coherence. Introduce more varied transitions (e.g., "in addition," "consequently," "however") to clarify relationships between ideas and paragraphs. Avoid over-reliance on repetitive structures to maintain reader engagement and improve overall cohesion.

Overall, the essay effectively structures its argument with a clear introduction, distinct body paragraphs, and a concluding statement that reinforces the thesis. Strengthening the logical connections between paragraphs and diversifying cohesive devices will elevate coherence and cohesion, potentially raising the band score in future assessments.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate range of vocabulary. The candidate utilizes words like "cybercriminals," "restrictions," "toxic," "reactionaries," and "ideology" effectively to discuss different aspects of media control. However, some repetitive usage of phrases like "access restrictions," "negative ideas," and "toxic content" limits the variety and impact of the vocabulary.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, consider using synonyms and related terms to avoid repetition. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "toxic content," explore alternatives such as "harmful material," "malicious content," or "dangerous information." This variation can enrich the essay’s lexical diversity and demonstrate a more nuanced understanding of the topic.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: While the essay generally conveys meaning clearly, there are instances where vocabulary could be more precise. For example, the phrase "set boundaries on the Internet, which is called the ‘Firewall’" could be clarified with more precise terminology like "Internet censorship mechanisms" or "firewall protections." Additionally, the use of "reactionaries" might be too broad; specifying the type of threat or ideology could improve precision.
- How to improve: Aim for exactness in vocabulary by using specific terms that accurately convey intended meanings. For example, instead of "negative ideas," specify whether these are "subversive ideologies" or "destabilizing propaganda." This specificity not only clarifies your points but also demonstrates a deeper grasp of the subject matter.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Spelling accuracy is generally sound throughout the essay. However, there are a few minor errors such as "innocents’" (should be "innocent’s") and "stable and peaceful life of people" (could be improved to "stable and peaceful livelihoods of people").
- How to improve: To improve spelling, consider proofreading with a focus on common errors like possessives and plurals. Developing a habit of reviewing written work for spelling accuracy before submission can help eliminate these minor errors and enhance overall clarity.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid grasp of vocabulary suitable for a Band 6 score, focusing on vocabulary range, precision, and spelling consistency can elevate the lexical resource score further. Integrating these suggestions will help in presenting ideas with greater clarity and sophistication, thereby enhancing the overall effectiveness of the essay.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 5

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a variety of sentence structures, including complex sentences and compound sentences. For instance, the essay effectively employs complex sentence structures to elaborate on points, such as "By having a grasp of the information, the ill content posted by the reactionaries can not go mainstream to affect civilians’ ideology." This sentence structure enhances clarity and adds sophistication to the argument.
- How to improve: While the essay demonstrates competence in using varied sentence structures, further enhancing coherence through the use of transitional phrases could strengthen the flow between ideas. For example, incorporating phrases like "however," "therefore," or "in conclusion" can improve the logical progression between paragraphs and ideas.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay maintains a generally accurate and coherent use of grammar and punctuation. There are instances where minor errors occur, such as "ill intentions" (should be "evil intentions") and "supposing the scheme was successful" (awkward phrasing). These minor issues do not significantly detract from the clarity of the argument but indicate occasional lapses in precision.
- How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, attention should be paid to verb agreement ("can not go mainstream"), word choice ("supposing" could be replaced with "if"), and ensuring consistent use of formal academic language ("ill intentions" could be substituted with "nefarious aims"). Additionally, revising punctuation use for better clarity, such as ensuring commas are appropriately placed for pauses and separating clauses, would further refine the essay’s presentation.

Overall, the essay effectively communicates its arguments with a diverse range of sentence structures and maintains a competent level of grammatical accuracy. By refining transitional phrases and addressing minor grammatical errors, the essay could achieve an even higher band score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy.

Bài sửa mẫu

In the past few decades, there has been ongoing debate regarding unrestricted access to information through various media channels, including the Internet, television, and newspapers. Some argue that all forms of information should be freely accessible without governmental oversight. However, I disagree with this perspective and believe that there are circumstances where government intervention is necessary. In this essay, I will outline my reasons for holding this view.

Firstly, implementing restrictions on access can help mitigate the risks posed by cybercriminals. For instance, internet firewalls are essential tools that prevent users from accessing websites containing malicious codes deliberately created by hackers. These codes are designed to compromise the identities of unsuspecting individuals, leading to potential theft and other criminal activities.

Secondly, exposure to harmful content such as gambling, violence, and harassment can have severe negative effects on individuals, potentially influencing them towards criminal behavior. Take, for instance, the Chessboard Killer case in Russia, where a notorious murderer committed numerous crimes and received a life sentence. He attributed his actions to reading about another criminal’s exploits during his formative years, illustrating how exposure to detrimental content can shape criminal behavior.

Moreover, governments can play a crucial role in thwarting the efforts of adversaries who seek to manipulate public opinion through media manipulation. By controlling the dissemination of harmful ideologies propagated by reactionary groups, governments can prevent civil unrest and maintain social stability. For example, timely intervention led to the arrest of leaders like those of the Viet Tan organization, who used media platforms to incite anti-government sentiments. This proactive approach prevented potential violence and strikes, ensuring the safety and well-being of the populace.

In conclusion, while advocating for unrestricted access to information may seem to uphold freedom, it is essential to recognize that government oversight of media can serve as a protective measure rather than a restriction of liberty. By implementing necessary controls, governments can shield civilians from exposure to harmful content and safeguard societal peace and stability.

This revised essay maintains the original structure and vocabulary as closely as possible while addressing grammar errors for clarity and coherence.