essay samples Task 2

Due to television and the internet, it is easier today for a large number of people to become famous. To what extent is this a positive or negative development?

As a result of television and the internet becoming more accessible, it is now less challenging for a significant number of individuals to become popular. While this can seem beneficial at times because of the positive influence some celebrities have, I think it is mostly negative due to the higher probability of instant fame, the impact of celebrity culture and the emergence of the echo chamber effect.

It is true that some famous people are using their platforms for the good. They can share useful information with their followers or even organize charities that are aimed at helping those in need. However, this group of public figures is the minority, as more individuals are becoming celebrities due to instant fame. In fact, they often create or engage in controversial events, gaining notoriety and featuring in viral videos. Some of these people desire to become famous only for the purpose of being known, with no other ambitions in mind.

As the number of celebrities grows, people’s obsession with them increases as well, but this enthusiasm can often be unhealthy. Celebrity culture has become so dominant that reality and talk shows are now some of the most-watched programs on TV and the internet. Such programs focus on the lives of famous people, including details of their private lives. Quite often, these individuals are not appropriate role models since they do not instil any valuable virtues into viewers’ minds.

Another negative feature of an ever-increasing number of well-known individual is the creation of eco-chambers. To be specific, some popular people, mostly influencers on social media, frequently spread their ideology to affect the views of thousands of people. These ideologies can be biased, and narrow-minded and follow a certain agenda, meaning fame can help to form the public’s opinion in an ignorant or malicious way.

In summary, the fact that it is now easier to become famous leads to more harm than benefit. The majority of popular figures are having a negative impact on in person and society as a whole.

In some countries, more and more people are becoming interested in finding out about the history of the house or building they live in. What are the reasons for this? How can people research this?

In certain countries, an increasing number of people are becoming enthusiastic about researching the history of the building they live in or the house they own. Reasons for this increased interest range from identifying the worth of the house to finding out the hidden mysteries related to it. To access such information, people need to use libraries, government records, and online forums.

There is a number of reasons that can explain people’s obsession with investigating the history of the particular house. The most obvious reason can be the financial one. Those who sell houses can benefit from information related to previous owners. If they find out that a celebrity or an important family lived in this facility, the price can automatically go up. The other reason worth mentioning is the tension related to one’s household. There are stories in which people admit hearing noises and experiencing paranormal activity, an event that can encourage them to study the building’s history.

Regardless of the reason for the interest behind a desire to know more about the house, there are similar ways to access such information. The easiest platform to use would be an online forum where a person who knows the answer can help with the investigation. Another method to gain information about the house is asking government workers for access to certain records. Census data, for example, could reveal information about the previous tenants of the building. In addition to government sources, libraries could be visited to read books that can potentially reveal information about the local area and the building of interest.

In conclusion, there are specific financial and psychological reasons why one would be interested in the history of the house they live in. As the examples above suggest, there are multiple ways to find needed information about such buildings.

Movies and computer games containing violence are popular. Some people say they have a negative effect on society and should be censored. Others say they are just harmless relaxation. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Violent computer games and movies have become quite popular over the past few decades. Some individuals believe they pose a threat and support censorship of such content because they think it affects society negatively. Others, however, state that movies and games containing violence are just a form of pleasure meant to help people relax. I believe there is no need for total censorship as long as there are various age-based restrictions and other limitations.

Violence in movies and games is often too explicit and can be considered as ‘too’ negative. There is a belief that such content can make people more aggressive and even inspired to mimic violent behavior in real life. In fact, there have been criminal cases where addiction to computer games has been cited as a reason for committing crimes, especially among teenagers. From this perspective, violence in various movies and computer games can be seen as a threat.

Others, on the other hand, believe violence is only a part of entertainment. In movies, violent scenes can help make the scenes more realistic, improving the overall storytelling experience. In games, violence can be used to provide more excitement and allow people to perform acts they would never be allowed to in real life. This is why games like GTA have been so commercially successful, earning billions of dollars for decades. Therefore, violent content is sometimes believed to help escapism, which means there is mental relief thanks to a movie or a game.

In my view, there should be some limitations for viewing and playing movies and games of violent nature. Children, for instance, should not be allowed to watch them on TV, with channels showing such content later in the day, preferably after 23:00. Also, violent computer games should not be sold to anyone under the age of 20. This and many other sensible restrictions can help protect the mental health of young people. However, violence in movies and games should be allowed for the entertainment of an older age group.

In conclusion, it is true that violent subject matter in movies and games can have a negative effect on the development of younger people. Yet, there is no need for a total ban. Instead, a few reasonable restrictions can help ensure such content is only accessed by adults.

It's proven, the mission is completed (first one)

I think I have to face my true self.

Some children spend hours every day on their smartphones. Why is this the case? Do you think this is a positive or a negative development?

Many children today spend hours daily on their smartphones. This occurs mainly due to the increasing integration of technology into daily life and a lack of parental supervision. While there are some benefits to this trend, the consequences are largely negative, as excessive smartphone use can lead to addiction and an unhealthy lifestyle.

Smartphones were originally designed for communication, but they have evolved into multifunctional tools essential for modern life. Children, like adults, often rely on these devices for educational purposes, social interaction, and entertainment. Educational apps and online learning platforms have become integral to their academic development. However, another key reason for this overuse is the absence of parental control. In some households, parents fail to set limits on screen time, allowing children unrestricted access to their phones. As a result, they spend excessive time on digital activities without proper regulation.

Despite these benefits, the impact of this trend is concerning for several reasons. Firstly, excessive smartphone use can lead to addiction, where children prioritize their devices over other important activities. This over-reliance on screens often contributes to a sedentary lifestyle, which can negatively affect physical health. Furthermore, excessive smartphone use can harm mental well-being. For example, prolonged exposure to violent games or social media may lead to behavioral issues, including aggression, anxiety, and social isolation. Studies have shown that children who spend more time on screens are at a higher risk of developing sleep disorders and experiencing a decline in academic performance.

In conclusion, children's excessive smartphone use, driven by technology's role and lack of parental control, has more harmful than beneficial effects. Therefore, it is crucial for parents to implement proper monitoring to ensure balanced smartphone usage.

Fossil fuels are the main source of energy around the world today. In some countries, the use of alternative sources of energy is replacing fossil fuels. Is this a positive or negative development?

Fossil fuels have long been the dominant source of energy worldwide, but in some countries, they are increasingly being replaced by alternative energy sources such as solar and wind power. Despite certain challenges, I firmly believe this transition is a positive development due to its long-term environmental and economic benefits.

One key advantage of shifting to alternative energy is sustainability. Unlike fossil fuels, which are finite and will eventually be depleted, renewable sources such as wind and solar power can be naturally replenished. This ensures a stable and continuous energy supply for future generations. Although the initial costs of setting up renewable energy infrastructure may be high, advancements in technology and government support can make these sources more affordable over time, making them a viable replacement for fossil fuels.

Additionally, the widespread use of fossil fuels has significantly contributed to environmental issues such as air pollution and climate change. The burning of coal, oil, and gas releases harmful emissions, leading to global warming and deteriorating air quality. In contrast, renewable energy sources produce little to no emissions, reducing pollution and improving public health. Given that millions of people suffer from respiratory diseases due to air contamination, transitioning to cleaner energy sources can lead to a healthier population and a more sustainable environment.

In conclusion, despite initial costs, transitioning to renewable energy is crucial for sustainability, environmental protection, and public health, ensuring a cleaner and more stable future.

(right) up your ˈ‍alley->

(informal) very suitable for you because it is something that you know a lot about or are very interested in

° This job seems right up your street

🥫
put/place something on (the) ˈ‍record | be/go on (the) ˈ‍record (as saying…)
to say something publicly or officially so that it may be written down and repeated
•He didn't want to go on the record as either praising or criticizing the proposal.
•I should like to place on record my sincere thanks to all those who have given support.

🥫
Background (⁶th meaning) -> used to refer to tasks or processes that the user is not actively working on at the present time

• in the background Programs can be left running in the background.

° Throughout this period, politics were kept firmly in the background.
🥫

Right ³ + adv./prep. all the way; completely
•
They drove right up to the door.
•
Everything is planned right down to the last detail.
🥫

sth called for research into...-> means that something necessitated, demanded, or required research on a particular topic, further investigation or study was needed in response to something.

° a 1920 report called for research into the whales in the sea around Antarctica.

Simply the spirit of adventure->

means that something is driven purely by a love for adventure, without any other motives like money, fame, or necessity!

Watching TV shows and movies about crime is becoming more and more popular. Why is this? What effect does that have on society?

It has been noted that watching movies and TV shows about crime has become increasingly popular. The main reason behind this is entertainment value of crime-related shows and movies. This trend often has negative consequences, as those shows can be a source of inspiration for many.

When a TV show or a movie is based on crime, it often entertains people because of its extraordinary nature. Viewers normally lead ordinary lifestyles, working or studying for the bigger part of the day. The majority of countries have tolerable crime levels, meaning many people live in safety. However, leading a peaceful life may seem boring to some, so what they often do is entertain themselves by immersing in a movie that shows them an alternative reality. This unique perspective is what makes crime stories appealing.

Although these movies and shows may not have any significant impact on many viewers, some can still be affected to a certain extent. Teenagers, in particular, can find crime to be inspirational and try to mimic violent behaviour they observe. In fact, some criminals often admitted to idolizing certain protagonists from their favorite movies. This means there is a correlation between one’s distorted ideology and action, occasionally leading to killings in public places. Even if there is no major crime occurring because of such inspiration, many teenagers may be interested in entering a life of crime instead of following a more traditional path in life.

In conclusion, movies and shows inspired by crime are appreciated for the exciting stories they portray. As a result, people, particularly youth, can be misguided in certain ways.

In the past, important knowledge of culture and history was stored in the museums. Nowadays information is freely available on the internet, so there is no need for museums. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

For a long time, museums have been serving as crucial sources of both cultural and historical information, showcasing items belonging to different civilizations, ethnic groups or events. Nevertheless, with the possibility of acquiring data online, some people have recently started to question the relevance of museums in today's world, claiming that they are no longer necessary. I completely disagree with this point of view for some reasons.

The primary argument in support of museums is that they provide clear evidence in the form of artefacts along with explanations. This makes them scientifically more valuable as opposed to information provided by online sources such as Wikipedia and forums which are contributed by ordinary people and are occasionally fact-checked. Consequently, information provided on the internet can lead people astray, causing misinterpretations, wrong data analysis, and flawed research. This is unlikely to be the case with museums, since researchers and people in general deal with tangible objects and related information on the spot.

Another reason why museums still play an important part in imparting cultural and historical knowledge is that they provide an immersive experience. For example, I have been to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., and was astonished by the gigantic aeroplane models on display, while at the same time familiarising myself with the history of different aircraft, pioneers in the field, and their qualities. The impact of such places is paramount in educating the youth because information on the internet is limited to text and some media, which can be boring for learners. We can also see some modern museums incorporate state-of-the-art technologies, such as augmented reality demonstrations and interactive shows, to enrich user experience. This clearly shows that in the digital age, museums are still relevant and even vital for providing education to people.

In conclusion, I don't support the notion that museums are obsolete in this day and age, although increasingly more people have access to the internet. This is because museums not only provide more accurate information about culture and history, but they also kindle one's interest more effectively than online resources, underpinning the essential impact of museums.

Societies give sportspeople and entertainment personality more valuable than professional workers such as doctors, nurses, teachers.

What is the main reason? Do you think it is a good or bad development?

https://t.me/c/2006752369/163

Gifts 🎁 for us

It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environments, such as the South Pole. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?

Human curiosity is unquenchable and often results in never-ending explorations, which is why it is currently possible to conduct scientific research and allow tourist expeditions in remote areas such as the South Pole. Although this can be beneficial in terms of scientific explorations, the drawbacks of this trend, such as environmental risks and disturbance of natural life, outweigh benefits.

Exploring the Earth is usually considered to be an advantageous pursuit as humans need more information about the planet. Similar to many parts of the ocean, some land areas remain undiscovered, meaning we do not have sufficient data about the planet we live on. For this reason, allowing scientists to go anywhere, including remote locations like the South Pole, for research purposes seems to be a rational idea.

Tourists, however, could pose a threat to the cycle of life in many remote regions. When tourism is allowed, humans tend to affect local ecosystems by bringing in traffic. Any transportation, including cars and airplanes, can result in higher air pollution, for instance. This issue alone could make living conditions in those remote areas much worse, transforming intact land into a spoilt territory that suffers from ecological crises.

Even if the ecological damage is not that massive, an animal’s peace could be disturbed when scientists or tourists are allowed in remote natural areas. Penguins, for instance, now have to co-exist with small populations of humans in Antarctica, meaning they should adapt to seeing humans in the land that was generally free of people for hundreds of years. If the human population of such areas increases, animals’ ecosystems may experience further changes.

In conclusion, even though science could benefit from exploration of extremely remote regions, trips to such areas should not be allowed to preserve local ecosystems and help animals lead a traditional life cycle.