IELTS Writing Task 2: Should Online News Be Free or Paid For?

IELTS Writing Practice — AI-Powered Feedback

Writing Prompt

Many newspapers now charge readers a subscription to access their websites. Some people believe reliable journalism must be paid for, while others argue that access to news should be free for everyone.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Show Band 8–9 model answer

In the digital age, an increasing number of newspapers have introduced paywalls for their online content. While some insist that good journalism inevitably comes at a price, others argue that news is a public good and should therefore remain free. Both perspectives have merit, but I believe a mixed model is the most sustainable and ethical solution.

On the one hand, there are compelling reasons why serious news outlets charge readers. Producing accurate, in-depth reporting is expensive: it requires experienced journalists, editors, fact-checkers and often complex legal support. Advertising revenue alone rarely covers these costs, especially as advertisers migrate to social media platforms. If all online news were free, many reputable organisations would struggle to survive, leaving the field open to low-cost, low-quality content. In this sense, paywalls help protect journalistic standards and independence, because newspapers are answerable primarily to their subscribers rather than to advertisers or political donors.

On the other hand, opponents of paid news argue that unrestricted access to information is essential in a democracy. When key stories about elections, health crises or environmental threats are hidden behind paywalls, citizens who cannot afford subscriptions may be less informed and thus less able to participate meaningfully in public life. This creates a worrying information gap between those who pay and those who do not. Moreover, in emergencies such as pandemics or natural disasters, paywalls can slow the rapid spread of life-saving information.

In my view, these competing concerns can be reconciled through a hybrid approach. Core public-interest content, such as breaking news, basic political coverage and crucial health information, should be freely accessible. More specialised material—detailed analysis, investigative reports, and niche commentary—can reasonably be reserved for subscribers. This ensures that a minimum level of reliable news is available to all, while still generating the revenue required to fund high-quality journalism.

In conclusion, although paid subscriptions are vital for sustaining professional news organisations, completely paywalled information risks deepening social inequality. A tiered system that combines free access to essential news with paid premium content best serves both democracy and journalistic integrity.

Why this response works

This essay fully addresses all parts of the task by outlining both sides of the argument and presenting a clear, consistent opinion favouring a hybrid model. The position is explicit in the introduction and conclusion and is developed logically throughout. Ideas are well extended with specific reasoning about funding, democracy and information gaps. Cohesion is strong, with clear paragraphing and effective use of linking phrases. Lexical resource is varied yet natural (e.g. “paywalls,” “public-interest content,” “journalistic integrity”), and grammar is accurate with a wide range of complex structures and no noticeable errors, making it a strong Band 8–9 sample.