GMAT Essays (AWA)

In some countries, television and radio programs are carefully censored for offensive language and behavior. In other countries, there is little or no censorship.

In your view, to what extent should government or any other group be able to censor television or radio programs? Explain, giving relevant
reasons and/or examples to support your position

The author of the topic would like to analyse the extend of monitoring offensive language and behavior. This topic is a conversial one as the definition of offensive action is very objective. Obviously, teasing one’s weakness even without the use of foul language must be strictly prohibited. It is clear that using foul language or vulgar act in some show is acceptable as the performer is tended to amuse the audience. The way to judge whether an artist’s behavior can be shown to public should depends on different occasions.

Firstly, mass media such as television and radio programs must be censored. They can be easily reached by children and it is our responsibility to filter obscene and offence materials before putting the materials to public. Because the mental growth for children are not completed, it is difficult for them to distinguish between right and wrong. For instance, my younger brother sometimes say foul language because he learn it from the television without knowing that it is wrong to do so. Yet those program should not be completely banned because it may serve the interest of adults. An alternative is to let organizations to issue parental guidance warning and schedule those program at night.

Secondly, speaking and writing that involves insulting and discriminating must not be allowed. It is a shame to insult or humiliate other people in today’s civilized world. A good example is a recent article written by a Chinese writer who stated that Philiphine as “nation of servant”. Such behavior would not only condemned by the public, but also created a negative effect on diplomacy between two countries.

However, public authorities should allow foul language to be used in causal occasions, given that those languagse are not targeted at particular individual or organization. A complete ban on them will undermine freedom of speech. For instance, comedians may use them in talk shows to make the show more funny. The intention is to enhance the quality of entertainment. These performances are often aimed at making money and not intended to disgust anyone.

To conclude, offensive language and behavior should be banned only if it cause anyone upset and not generally accept by the public. It is crucial to censor the public media in a flexible but careful manner.

There are a lot of good points here, but I think there is room for improvement. If I were to write a summary of the paragraphs of your essay, here's what it would look like.

1) - some programming, but not all should be censored
2) - mass media must be censored
3) - discrimination should be censored
4) - some foul language is ok
5) - there should be some censorship

The second paragraph seems to contradict the first, because it implies that all media should be censored. Also, from your first paragraph, it is difficult to understand what exactly your position is. I would be more explicit and state, for instance, "Free speech should prevail, except in extreme instances where it threatens the safety or dignity of individuals." Remember the question you are trying to answer: "In your view, to what extent should government or any other group be able to censor television or radio programs?"

Since you are sort of arguing both sides of the story in this case, I would break away from the usual format of having strictly supporting paragraphs following the intro. Maybe have one paragraph talk about the importance of freedom of speech. Then two others on the need to regulate foul language and the need to ban hate speech.

I don't know if this is a GMAT rule, but I would advise against writing about your little brother. To me, it personalizes a formal essay too much. You can still use all the info, but just refer to him as "a child" or something general like that.

analyse the extend of monitoring offensive language

the 'extent'

This topic is a conversial one as the definition of offensive action is very objective.

Objective is when things are black and white. I think you mean 'subjective'.

There are other little grammar bits that I disagree with. The scoring system allows some spelling/grammar errors, but they need to be kept to a minimum to avoid penalties.

best of luck in your studies and in writing your GMAT