+0

Some people think that mobile phones should be banned in public places like libraries,

shops and on public transport.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Essay:

Many people argue that using mobile phones in all public areas should not be an acceptable behavior. Personally, I partly concur with this opinion.


The most fundamental reason why we had better not use our phones in public places is discouraging real interaction. The public places are obviously where people are likely to engage face-to-face with each other. Nevertheless, in the age of cutting-edge and versatile phones, people addicted to using smartphones tend to only pay attention to applications or contents in their own devices, regardless of the presence of many people around them. For instance, in Vietnam, a multitude of youngsters only depend on how good-looking backgrounds are to determine destinations to hang out. The primary culprit for this matter is that their purposes are only about vivid photos taken by smartphones and posted on social media to beautify their virtual accounts. The conversations about life, work or study are not their priority.


Apart from the practical advantage expressed above, I believe that this rule also exists several downsides and the most adverse drawback relates to work. As working via emails or social networks is increasingly thriving worldwide, smartphones play an indispensable role in each individual’s businesses. To illustrate, in this day and age, numerous people rely on smartphone applications such as Facebook page or Uber (a ride-haling application) to earn a good living. If they are not allowed to use their phones when needed, their income will be negatively affected, which could breed not only the spike in poverty rate but also national economic downturn.


In conclusion, despite a positive impact on society, I hold the opinion that this rule also leads to adverse influences on the public.

+1

Many people argue that using mobile phones in all some (The topic statement did not say "all" public areas. ) public areas should not be an acceptable behavior. Personally, I partly concur with this opinion.

The most fundamental reason why we had better should not use our phones in public places is because it interferes with people's interactions. discouraging real interaction. (wrong usage.) The public places are obviously where people are likely to engage face-to-face with each other. Nevertheless, in the age of mobile cutting-edge and versatile (That does not fit. The topic is about bothering or disturbing the people around you so that they do not enjoy themselves.) phones, people addicted to using smartphones tend to only pay attention to applications or contents in their own devices, regardless of the presence of many people around them. For instance, in Vietnam, a multitude (wrong word) of youngsters (Youngsters are children aged 7 to perhaps 12. Is that who you mean? ) only depend on how good-looking backgrounds (I don't know what this is.) are to determine destinations to hang out. (That is informal. Inappropriate for a formal essay.) The primary culprit for this matter is that their purposes are only about vivid photos taken by smartphones and posted on social media to beautify their virtual accounts. (That seems to be unrelated to the topic. Off-topic.) The conversations about life, work or study are not their priority.(That is off-topic. )

Apart from this practical advantage expressed above, (I did not read any advantage to using a phone in a library or shop.) I believe that this rule also exists several downsides (ungrammatical. Also, there is not rule, There is only a suggestion.) and the most adverse drawback relates to work. As working via emails or social networks is increasingly thriving worldwide, smartphones play an indispensable role in each individual’s businesses. To illustrate, As an illustration, in this day and age, numerous people rely on smartphone applications such as Facebook page or Uber (a ride-haling application) to earn a good living. If they are not allowed to use their phones when needed, their income will be negatively affected, which could breed not only the spike (unnatural, incorrect usage) in poverty rate but also national economic downturn.

In conclusion, despite a positive impact on society (What is the positive impact on society of a ban on mobile phones?) , I hold the opinion that this rule also leads to adverse influences on the public.


Your essay was off-topic. Here are some ideas for this topic:

Mobile phones should be turned off in movie theaters because their bright screens are very distracting for the other people in the audience. If they ring for an incoming call or message, people nearby will be very annoyed. Another place where mobile phones are a nuisance is in a public library. Silence is necessary, and people trying to read or study would be bothered by the buzzing or ringing of phones. And of course, they must be banned in class, because students need to focus on the teacher, not their Facebook account or their favorite online game. Besides, it is very tempting to cheat on an exam by getting an answer from Google on a smartphone..

There are other public places where the use should not be completely banned. For example, a shopper can compare the prices in one store with those in nearby stores. That gives an advantage to the price-conscious shopper and also stimulates competition between the merchants. So mobile phones should not be banned in stores. Their use should be limited on buses and trains. The phone can be used, but in silent mode, and not for playing loud music or talking loudly. This behavior is inconsiderate of the other riders.

In conclusion, a rule banning mobile phones would be welcome in certain places such as theaters and the classroom, and restriction on their use in other places such as public transport and libraries. Phones should be permitted in all other public places as long as they do not interfere with others' enjoyment.