Hi Ma-Frank and ChrisLuke for the essay and comments (and replies!)
Some great comments here and some very good features in the essay.
I would reword the intro to remove the definition of journalist (your second sentence). It's often good to have a definition, but here it doesn't seem to add to your essay. I would also chang the word 'life information' - I don't know what it means. Perhaps something clearer like 'current affairs, politics, sports, entertainment, arts and celebrity gossip.' There's no way to condense these into a single phrase. Your term cannot be new - it has to be comprehensible for most of your readers. It doesn't matter how clear it is to you: communication occurs in the response, not the sending.
Paragraph Two: Coherence and Cohesion
This is the most interesting paragraph in your essay and has many ideas. In fact, the problem is that these ideas (some of them are very good) wander around each other. ChrisLuke noticed this in paragraph Two when you discussed the history of journalism.It's a valid argument, but you need to tie up the ideas in the paragraph. Your topic sentence for the paragraph is too long and has too many ideas.
The result is that your paragraph does not really progress. It waltzes around the idea and attacks it from several angles in a kind of circular arrangement. It would be better, or at least standard to IELTS examiners, if it had THREE separate ideas which built up or progressed consecutively. Have a look at the official descriptors for IELTS Task 2 Writing (public version) here, under Coherence and Cohesion, and look for the phrase "clear overall progression."
Here's a possible rewrite using some of the ideas in your paragraph, but in a different order.
Short Topic Sentence: There are several reasons why I generally trust journalists. First Idea: First of all, as in most professions, the great majority of people working in journalism are honest and responsible. More information: There will always be some bad apples or people motivated by greed or ideology, but most are ethical and trustworthy. Second idea: Second, journalism may have changed, but the core of the job is still the same. Today journalists work not just for newspapers, but on radio, on TV, on the internet. More information: Despite the different skills needed for each however, their core skills and characteristics are still required: the ability to find the truth and distinguish fact from fiction. Even more information: In fact these different fields allow us to compare different journalists and reports. If I need to know more about a short TV report by one journalist, I can compare it with a long newspaper article or an internet post by a local journalist. Third Idea: Finally, there is such intense competition between different news organizations that it is very difficult to fool all of the reporters. More information: One journalist or media organization is bound to find the truth of the situation.
(184 words: That’s a very long paragraph, but I’m trying to use all the ideas from your paragraph and develop them a little more)
Word Choice/Word Form/Usage
- We need variety of information → We need a variety of information
- As ethical journalists they possess some common characteristics → Good journalists possess some common characteristics
- they must be straightforward, honest. → they must be straightforward and honest.
- journalists need to have abilities to collect, analyze and judge complicated even inconsistent information → journalists need to have the ability to collect, analyze and judge even complicated or inconsistent information
- They should be knowledgeable and independent spirit which can ensure they are not cheated by fraudulent information. → They should be knowledgeable and independent to ensure they are not cheated by fraudulent information.
ChrisLuke, I know I said you were too informal before, but I'm happy with Ma-Frank's use of 'we' and 'I.' In fact I didn't even notice it! The tone seems natural and appropriate to me so I don't see any need to change it.
I absolutely agree with what ChrisLuke said about the length of the third paragraph (it's very short compared to Paragraph Two).
The first thing an examiner will see before they start to read is the paragraph layout. If one paragraph is very long and another very short, then the examiner will automatically begin to look at the descriptors under the heading Coherence and Cohesion and think Band 5 ("paragraphing may be inadequate") or maybe Band 6, under Task Response "presents relevant main ideas but some may be inadequately developed" (because of the short length of the paragraph). Aim to keep the body paragraphs the same length.
Ma_Frank's conclusion definitely needs more work or simplification.
The topic sentence for Paragaph Two is very long. Try to make topic sentences short (4-12 words). They will be clearer and more effective.
Overall Ma-Frank it's an interesting essay with many good ideas. You could reduce it to 275 words, remove some unclear passages, add more examples and it would be stronger.
Thanks for responding to ChrisLuke's suggestions and we look forward to more essays from you here. Don't be afraid to comment on others as well!