Some people think that detailed description of crime scenes in newspapers and on TV can have a bad influence on the public, so this kind of information should be restricted in the media. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The notion that media broadcasts of detailed descriptions of crime scenarios have detrimental effects on the general public, so this type of information should be restricted. I wholeheartedly agree with this statement considering their impacts on people's minds.

To begin with, there are numerous unfavorable effects when crime scenes are broadcast on television programs in detail. The most obvious drawback is the obsession they offer people's thinking. These scenes often contain violence and aggression, as a result, their viewers can be easily impressionable with them, especially children. For example, the recent murderous case in Vinh Long has generated fears and phobias for many, because of the murderer’s cruelty. Some individuals admit that they can not concentrate on their work whenever they think about it. In other words, crime scenes can potentially lead to proficient reduction in the workplace and misleading perceptions.

Some may argue that besides the detrimental effects of crime scenes, there are certain advantages when these scenes are on air. The most significant rationale is that watching them can prevent potential crimes in the future, as people may comprehend how criminals works. However, I believe that there are more effective solutions that can address this issue without showing violent images and videos. Instead of broadcasting these details, media content producers should focus on crime signals, and from this, propose practical measures so that people can avoid falling victim to these types of crimes.

In conclusion, I am of the opinion that crime scenes should be restricted in the media, considering their effect on public's mental health. Consequently, governments should implement restriction by enacting laws and censoring when these scenes are broadcast.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The notion that" -> "The belief that"
Explanation: "The notion that" can sound somewhat informal and vague in academic writing. "The belief that" is more precise and commonly used in formal academic contexts to introduce an opinion or idea.
"wholeheartedly agree" -> "strongly agree"
Explanation: "Wholeheartedly" is an emotional expression that may not be suitable for academic writing. "Strongly agree" maintains a formal tone and is more appropriate for academic discourse.
"obsession they offer people’s thinking" -> "preoccupation they induce in people’s minds"
Explanation: "Obsession they offer people’s thinking" is awkward and unclear. "Preoccupation they induce in people’s minds" is more precise and academically formal, clearly conveying the impact on mental processes.
"impressionable with them" -> "impressed by them"
Explanation: "Impressionable with them" is grammatically incorrect. "Impressed by them" is the correct form and maintains the intended meaning.
"can not concentrate" -> "cannot concentrate"
Explanation: "Can not" is a less formal contraction. "Cannot" is the correct form for formal writing.
"proficient reduction" -> "significant reduction"
Explanation: "Proficient reduction" is incorrect and unclear. "Significant reduction" is the correct term, indicating a substantial decrease in performance or quality.
"misleading perceptions" -> "misleading impressions"
Explanation: "Perceptions" can refer to a broader range of cognitive processes, whereas "impressions" specifically refers to the immediate, often superficial, effects of something on one’s mind.
"works" -> "operate"
Explanation: "Works" is too informal and vague in this context. "Operate" is more precise and appropriate for discussing the actions of criminals.
"crime signals" -> "crime indicators"
Explanation: "Crime signals" is not a standard term. "Crime indicators" is a more commonly used and academically appropriate term for referring to signs or markers of criminal activity.
"proposed practical measures" -> "suggest practical measures"
Explanation: "Propose" is correct but "suggest" is more commonly used in academic writing to imply a recommendation or proposal.
"public’s mental health" -> "public mental health"
Explanation: "Public’s mental health" is grammatically incorrect. "Public mental health" is the correct form, referring to the health of the general public.
"implement restriction" -> "implement restrictions"
Explanation: "Implement restriction" is grammatically incorrect. "Implement restrictions" is the correct form, indicating the act of putting measures into effect.

These changes enhance the formal tone and precision of the essay, aligning it more closely with academic writing standards.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both parts of the question. It acknowledges the potential negative influence of detailed crime descriptions in the media and expresses full agreement with restricting such information.
- How to improve: To enhance completeness, the essay could delve deeper into the opposing viewpoint, acknowledging that some argue for the educational value of crime scene broadcasts despite their drawbacks.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear stance throughout, consistently arguing for restricting detailed crime scene descriptions due to their negative impact on the public.
- How to improve: Ensure that each paragraph reinforces this position explicitly, avoiding any ambiguity or contradictory statements that may dilute the clarity of the argument.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas clearly, such as the negative effects of crime scenes on mental health and proposes alternative solutions like focusing on crime signals rather than graphic details.
- How to improve: To strengthen, provide more detailed examples or studies that illustrate the psychological impacts of media portrayals of crime scenes, making the argument more compelling and grounded in evidence.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains largely on topic, discussing the effects of detailed crime scene descriptions and the argument for restricting such information.
- How to improve: Avoid minor tangents, such as the brief mention of potential crime prevention through understanding criminal behavior, which could distract from the central focus on restricting media content.

Overall, the essay effectively addresses the prompt with a strong argument supported by relevant examples and clear reasoning. To achieve a higher band score, it could benefit from more nuanced exploration of counterarguments and deeper evidence-based analysis of the psychological and societal impacts of media portrayals of crime scenes.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a generally logical organization of ideas. It begins with a clear introduction that states the author’s opinion ("I wholeheartedly agree") and outlines the reasons. Each subsequent paragraph follows a structured approach: one paragraph discusses the negative impacts of detailed crime scene descriptions, while the other acknowledges a potential counterargument before refuting it. The conclusion summarizes the author’s stance effectively.
- How to improve: To further enhance logical organization, consider refining transitions between paragraphs to strengthen the flow of ideas. Ensure each paragraph serves a distinct purpose and contributes clearly to the overall argument without overlap.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay is adequately divided into paragraphs, each focusing on a specific aspect of the argument. Paragraphs begin with clear topic sentences that guide the reader through the author’s points. However, some paragraphs could be more tightly focused on a single idea to improve clarity and coherence.
- How to improve: Work on ensuring that each paragraph centers around a single main idea, supported by relevant examples and explanations. For instance, the paragraph discussing the negative impacts of crime scenes could delve deeper into specific psychological or societal effects to strengthen the argument.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs basic cohesive devices such as transition words ("To begin with," "However," "In conclusion") and pronouns ("they," "these"). These devices generally help in maintaining coherence by linking ideas within and between sentences.
- How to improve: To elevate coherence, consider incorporating a wider variety of cohesive devices such as synonyms, parallel structures, and referencing keywords from earlier parts of the essay. This can help in reinforcing connections between ideas and enhancing overall clarity and cohesion.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid level of coherence and cohesion appropriate for a Band 6 score, further attention to refining paragraph structure and diversifying cohesive devices could elevate the clarity and logical progression of ideas, thereby enhancing the overall effectiveness of the argument presented.

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 satisfactory range of vocabulary, with words like "detrimental," "obsession," "impressionable," "proficient," and "rationale." These words effectively convey the writer’s ideas on the negative impacts of detailed crime scene descriptions in media.
- How to improve: To enhance the range of vocabulary further, consider incorporating more sophisticated synonyms or exploring different lexical fields. For instance, instead of "detrimental effects," consider using "adverse consequences" or "pernicious outcomes" for greater variety and nuance.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary with reasonable precision. For example, terms like "violence and aggression" accurately describe the content of crime scenes. However, there are instances where vocabulary could be more precise, such as using "impact" instead of "effect" or "mental well-being" instead of "mental health" for more precise terminology.
- How to improve: Focus on using words that precisely capture the intended meaning. Avoid vague or overused terms where possible. Use specific vocabulary that aligns closely with the context of crime reporting and its effects on society.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Spelling is generally accurate throughout the essay. There are no significant errors that distract from understanding.
- How to improve: Maintain this level of spelling accuracy by proofreading carefully and considering using spell-check tools if not already doing so. Pay particular attention to commonly misspelled words or typos that might be overlooked.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid grasp of vocabulary usage and spelling accuracy appropriate for a Band 6 score in Lexical Resource. To improve further, continue to diversify vocabulary choices, strive for even more precise word selection, and maintain consistent spelling accuracy. These refinements will help elevate the lexical sophistication and overall clarity of your essays.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a satisfactory range of sentence structures. It includes simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, the essay uses complex structures such as "To begin with" to introduce a paragraph and employs conditional sentences like "Some may argue that…". These structures contribute to coherence and show a reasonable variety in sentence construction.
- How to improve: To enhance variety further, consider incorporating more complex sentence structures such as inversion ("Not only did the crime scenes impact viewers…"), using passive voice judiciously to vary sentence focus ("The impact of crime scenes is often underestimated"), and experimenting with rhetorical questions or exclamatory sentences for emphasis. This diversification can elevate the sophistication of expression and increase lexical flexibility.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay maintains good grammatical accuracy with few errors. It effectively uses punctuation marks like commas and periods to separate clauses and sentences. An example of effective punctuation usage includes the comma in "In other words, crime scenes can potentially lead to proficient reduction in the workplace…". However, there are occasional errors in subject-verb agreement ("media content producers should focus on crime signals, and from this, propose practical measures…") that slightly affect clarity.
- How to improve: Focus on ensuring consistent subject-verb agreement throughout the essay. Pay attention to singular/plural forms and ensure verbs correspond accurately with their subjects ("media content producers should focus… and should propose…"). Additionally, consider using more advanced punctuation like semicolons to connect related independent clauses or colons to introduce lists or explanations. This will further enhance the structural integrity of complex sentences and improve overall coherence.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid command of grammar and sentence structures appropriate for an IELTS Band 7. To progress to a higher band score, continue refining sentence variety and grammatical accuracy, particularly focusing on eliminating minor errors and incorporating more sophisticated structures and punctuation usage.

Bài sửa mẫu

The belief that detailed descriptions of crime scenes in newspapers and on TV strongly influence the public negatively, leading to a preoccupation they induce in people’s minds, hence they should be restricted in the media. I strongly agree with this viewpoint, given the impacts on individuals.

To begin with, there are numerous adverse effects when crime scenes are broadcast on television in detail. The most significant drawback is the strong impression they create on viewers. These scenes often feature violence and aggression, which can easily impress people, especially children. For instance, the recent brutal case in Vinh Long has left many shocked due to the cruelty of the perpetrator. Some individuals have admitted that they cannot concentrate on their work when these thoughts come to mind. In other words, crime scenes can lead to a significant reduction in productivity and create misleading impressions.

Some may argue that, besides the harmful effects, there are certain advantages to airing crime scenes. The main argument is that exposure to such scenes may deter potential criminals in the future, as people may understand criminal behaviors better. However, I believe there are more effective solutions to address this issue without showing violent images and videos. Instead of broadcasting these details, media producers should focus on indicators of crime and suggest practical measures to help people avoid becoming victims.

In conclusion, I firmly believe that broadcasting detailed crime scenes should be restricted in the media due to their impact on public mental health. Therefore, governments should implement restrictions through laws and censorship to regulate when such scenes can be broadcast.