Being a celebrity - such as a famous film star or sports personality - brings

problems as well as benefits.

Fame undoubtedly changes a person's life. Nevertheless, such changes are not always for the
better, for all professions, from movie stars to sports personalities, being a celebrity has
challenges and benefits.
Undoubtedly, fame can be extremely rewarding. Firstly, a sense of personal fulfillment must
come from making your family proud of what you have achieved. Secondly, celebrities can reap
enormous financial rewards from their fame. On top of their fees, the famous have the potential
to earn huge amounts of money from promoting luxury brands. This type of wealth is possible
because celebrities are often seen as role models, so people want to copy them and buy what they
have. Being the focus of the world's attention is lucrative.
However, achieving this status is not without its problems. First, celebrities can no longer live a
normal life. If they visit public places, such as malls and bars, people will crowd around them
demanding a picture or autograph. To avoid this, the famous are forced to live in gated
communities, visit the most expensive restaurants and hotels, and hire personal bodyguards for
themselves and their families. Second, being a public figure means that your life is like an open
book. The public love to gossip about the lives of celebrities, so it is almost impossible for them
to have any privacy. As a result, the famous can be made to feel isolated and under siege.
To sum up, whilst being famous brings huge financial benefits, there are even more significant
drawbacks. In my view, only those who manage to handle the problems associated with fame,
can truly be said to reap its rewards. (283 words)

(Source- The Key to IELTS Writing by Pauline Cullen).

Many people believe that social networking sites (such as Facebook) have had a huge negative
impact on both individuals and society.
To what extent do you agree?
Social networking sites, for instance Facebook, are thought by some to have had a detrimental
effect on individual people as well as society and local communities. However, while I believe
that such sites are mainly beneficial to the individual, I agree that they have had a damaging
effect on local communities.
With regards to individuals, the impact that online social media has had on each individual
person has clear advantages. Firstly, people from different countries are brought together through
such sites as Facebook whereas before the development of technology and social networking

1
sites, people rarely had the chance to meet or communicate with anyone outside of their
immediate circle or community. Secondly, Facebook also has social groups which offer
individuals a chance to meet and participate in discussions with people who share common
interests.
On the other hand, the effect that Facebook and other social networking sites have had on
societies and local communities can only be seen as negative. Rather than individual people
taking part in their local community, they are instead choosing to take more interest in people
online. Consequently, the people within local communities are no longer forming close or
supportive relationships. Furthermore, society as a whole is becoming increasingly disjointed
and fragmented as people spend more time online with people, they have never met face to face
and who they are unlikely to ever meet in the future.
To conclude, although social networking sites have brought individuals closer together, they have
not had the same effect on society or local communities. Local communities should do more to
try and involve local people in local activities in order to promote the future of community life.

(IELTS LIZ)

Nowadays more and more young people hold the important positions in the government. Some
people think that it is a good thing, while others argue that it is not suitable. Discuss both
these views and give your opinion.
Running a nation is an arduous task and in the present times more and more young people are
holding top positions in government offices. Some people opine that this situation is good,
whereas others are sceptical about it. In the following paragraphs, I intend to discuss both views.
I, personally side with the former view.
There are many reasons why some people are in favour of young people holding the positions of
power. To begin with, the youth are enthusiastic and zealous. They have a great vision and the
spirit to take the nation forward. They are not confined to conventions and are willing to try new
things. They are ready to face challenges. Secondly, they are better physically, which enables
them to fulfil some tough jobs.
Furthermore, young leaders could be a source of inspiration for the youth to step forward and do
something for the benefit of the country. Finally, the young have a clean track record and the
younger leaders are less prone to corruption and similar asocial activities than the old ones
whose aim is to be in the seats of power somehow. Only youth has the innocence, which can
drive the country forward.
On the other hand, the main reason given by those who think that it is not proper to give the reins
of the nation in raw hands is that the young are impatient and lack social experience. Any of their

2
hasty decisions may have serious consequences. They believe that the important posts should be
in the hands of the more experienced sexagenarians and octogenarians.
Summing up, in the present scenario, it is better to let the energetic youth take the nation forward
by offering them important posts in the government. An emerging nation may not be able to cope
with the conventional style of functioning of the elderly.
( IELTS Academic Essays From The Past Exams - Dr. Kiranpreet Kaur Makkar)