Topic: Some people suggest that there should be restrictions on a detailed description of crimes

crimes in the media

Topic: Some people suggest that there should be restrictions on a detailed description of crimes in the newspapers and on television. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In recent years, the question of whether or not officers should control the detailed description of crimes in the media has sparked a controversy. Although individuals have right to know what happened specifically, the details of offence should not be entirely public in the newspapers and on TV.

Several reasons can be cited to explain why the information of crimes should be limited on the Internet. First, if polices made the details of crimes public, offenders and would-be ones could become more subtle in committing crimes. In fact, by gaining unlimited access to detailed description of previous crimes, they are able to apprehend process to work cases of polices and offend more perfectly, which creates difficulties for polices to solve down the road. Another reason is by revealing the details of offence, these articles can trigger victim's and their family's torment, which implies the information should be limited in the media as a way to protect them. This means that journalists and reporters will contact victims so as to exploit information, which makes them irritated and wretched when remembering again.

The restrictions on a detailed description of crimes, particularly serious ones, on the Internet is reinforced by more supporting evidence below. Firstly, if whole information was revealed, this could shock many people, especially young children. For example, horrible sense of the blood and violent images will cause obsession to kids who are vulnerable in a long term, which implies this limitation is imperative. Secondly, in order to boost ratings, many newsrooms spare no expense in drawing public attention through currently hot crimes. This means that they can provide inaccurate information and exaggeration, which shows insensitivity and cause irritation among the masses.

In conclusion, the description of crimes in the media should be strictly controlled. By considering the pros and cons of this suggestion, people can make best decisions for themselves.

Strong points:
This is a well- structured essay and most of the content is valid and reasonable.

Weak points:
There are several mistakes that are notable to me.

1. ' a controversy' refers to a particular argument but I guess you want to mention the controversy itself, so you should change it to a uncountable noun form.

2. ' right ' --> right is a countable noun so you should make it countable --> add 'a' or 'the'
3. 'polices' --> police is already in a plural form and always go with 'the' --> should make it ' the police'
4. 'the details of offence should not be entirely public' --> ' should not be entirely made public'
5. there is certain overlap between the second point of paragraph 2 and first point of paragraph 1 --> I guess there is a need to rewrite

You should always make sure to review the discussion question / instruction after you have drafted your response. That way, you will see if you have actually responded to the prompt or, if you misunderstood the prompt and responded to it in a manner that can be considered counter to the discussion instruction. In this case, you totally misunderstood the prompt question and in the process, failed to respond to the task question as provided. That means, the TA score for this essay will be scored based on how it does not respond to the discussion question. Take a look at this:

DQ: To what extent do you agree or disagree?
YR: Although individuals have right to know ... the newspapers and on TV.

As you can see, your response is not aligned with the expected format. This is an extent question that requires a measured dis/agreement response. Instead, you offered a personal opinion based on a discussion instruction that you made up. You failed to see that you did not properly respond to the discussion instruction, the most pivotal scoring point of the TA, because you did not double check your response prior to submitting the essay. Never assume that your first draft is final and that is responds accurately to the discussion instruction or prompt question. That is how almost all the students fail the test.

Never use more than one topic sentence per paragraph unless required to do so. The second topic sentence is always what causes an under developed paragraph presentation. In this discussion, You are providing more reasons than justifications to your reasons. That is why the paragraphs come across are not fully explained and thus, lacking in clarity. Unless you can learn to use connecting sentences in the paragraph, simply using numerical ordinals for your reasons will not help create a cohesive and coherent essay.