Task 2 > Restriction of mobile phones

[Damien P.]

Hey everyone,
Since I am not used to write under pressure, I prefer to turn towards you in order to get an objective opinion.
I did this essay this afternoon.

Thank you in advance

Ownership of mobile phones has risen dramatically in recent years despite the potentially harmful effects they may have on our health and on society. Governments should introduce measures to restrict ownership of mobile phones to those who need them for their work.

The beginning of the 21st century has seen the exponential evolution of ultra-fast communication devices, such as mobile phones. Initially seen by many as a miracle, the latter have since then been involved in a certain number of scandals about their noxious effects.

Arguments in favour of the restriction of mobile phones are numerous, and could be classified into two main categories: health and social reasons. First, their use has effects on the human body. Besides being one of the main factors of road accidents, it is argued that cellphones emit radio waves that represent a danger for the brain. Young people should even be warier, since their body is still developing. This effect on their mental development could also be noticed on concentration. This leads to our second point: the influence on social development. It has been proven that new technologies as social networks or smartphones foster dependence on technology and can harm our social balance. Thus, if everything worked fine in the past, why would we use mobile phones without expressly needing them?

This last argument would be entirely valid if the nature of evolution per se was not to be an answer to a specific need. In fact, cellulars fulfil a demand for instant and direct communication, as when one is stuck in an unpleasant place. Even though they have negative effects, we could use them with moderation instead of simply forbidding them for personal use. They are legal and do not endanger 100 per cent of their users. Did we forbid cars because of their influence in road accidents? Finally, how is the professional need for mobile phones fairly quantifiable? Indeed, it is difficult to judge if a user’s needs are more professional than others’. Students also rely on this communication technology to gather and organise group works, for instance.

Hence my opinion that despite a moral goodwill and a desire to protect people, I do not believe that such a prohibition on the personal use of cellphones is a good idea, either for freedom and practical reasons.

[durai]

Hi,

your task response is weak...
you need to whether government should restrict or not ,by allowing only people who work can use it.....

can say
1. yes, public sector should limit ownership or
2. no, because it affects freedom and safety.

stand on one point and then support argument with your reasons.

[Damien P.]

Thank you!
Generally, can I present two opinions and then make my choice?
I noticed that on prep services like Road to IELTS, on which some essays presented a double opinion before stating the author's.

Which band score would you give to this one, actually?
How is the grammar?

[Flick]

Ownership of mobile phones has risen dramatically in recent years despite the potentially harmful effects they may have on our health and on society. Governments should introduce measures to restrict ownership of mobile phones to those who need them for their work.

The beginning of the 21st century has seen the exponential evolution of ultra-fast communication devices, such as mobile phones. Initially seen by many as a miracle, the latter have since then been involved in a certain number of scandals regarding their noxious effects.(<-- Great introduction.)

Arguments in favour of the restriction of mobile phones are numerous, and could be classified into two main categories: health and social reasons. First, their use has effects on the human body. Besides being one of the main factors of road accidents, it is argued that cellphones emit radio waves that represent a danger to the brain. Young people should be even warier, since their bodies are still developing.(<-- Because 'people' is a plural noun, the following verb should be plural. For example, 'The person is happy' is singular, 'The people are happy' is plural.) This effect on their mental development could also be noticed in their ability to concentrate. This leads to our second point: the influence on social development. It has been proven that new technologies such as social networks or smartphones foster dependence on technology and can harm our social balance. Thus, if everything worked fine in the past, why would we use mobile phones without expressly needing them?

This last argument would be entirely valid if the nature of evolution per se was not an answer to a specific need. In fact, cellular phones fulfil a demand for instant and direct communication, as when one is stuck in an unpleasant place. Even though they have negative effects, we should use them in moderation instead of simply forbidding them for personal use. They are legal and do not endanger 100 per cent of their users. Did we forbid cars because of their influence in road accidents? (<-- Really good point.) Finally, how is the professional need for mobile phones fairly quantifiable? Indeed, it is difficult to judge if a user’s needs are more professional than others’. Students also rely on this communication technology to gather and organise group work, for instance.

Hence my opinion that despite a moral goodwill and a desire to protect people, I do not believe that such a prohibition on the personal use of cellphones is a good idea, either for freedom and practical reasons.

Really good essay - well written. Good job!

[Damien P.]

Thanks!

I will work on my prepositions then.