Band 7.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.0 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-10-06

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

In some societies, obesity is regarded as a major problem. Some people believe that junk food advertising is largely to blame for this problem and should be banned. However, others feel that junk food advertising does not contribute to the problem of obesity and should not be banned.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience·and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence. Write at least 250 words.

Student answer (Band 7.0)

Nowadays, there is a lot of discussion about obesity as a major problem. Some individuals believe that the problem for this is advertising of junk food and should be banned from everywhere, while some people think that junk food advertising does not accounted for the problem of obesity and should not be banned. This essay will discuss both prespectives and then explain why I believe that adverstisment had played major role in obesity.

Those who support a ban argue that advertising shapes eating habits, particularly among children. Young people are highly impressionable, and colourful campaigns that use cartoon characters, free toys and celebrity endorsements make sugary snacks and fast food appear fun and desirable. Over time, this can build lifelong preferences for unhealthy products. The evidence from countries that have restricted such advertising is encouraging. Chile, for example, introduced strict limits on marketing aimed at children in 2016, and studies later recorded a significant fall in the purchase of sugary drinks.

On the other hand, opponents claim that advertising is only a minor factor. They point out that obesity results from a combination of causes, including sedentary lifestyles, a lack of exercise, genetics and low income, which pushes families towards cheap, calorie-dense food. In their view, people should take personal responsibility for what they eat, and parents, not the government, should decide what their children consume. Critics of a ban also argue that it would interfere with free enterprise and that adverts for legal products should not be silenced.

In my opinion, a ban on junk food advertising, at least during children's programming and on social media, would be beneficial. It is true that advertising is not the only cause of obesity, but this does not mean it is harmless. Children cannot easily recognise persuasive intent, so it is unfair to expect them to resist sophisticated marketing. A ban should also be accompanied by other measures, such as healthier school meals and more physical education, so that the problem is tackled from several directions.

In conclusion, although obesity has many causes, junk food advertising plays a real part in encouraging unhealthy habits. Restricting it, especially where children are concerned, is a reasonable and effective step.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.5

The response successfully addresses all parts of the task by discussing both views regarding junk food advertising and providing a clear personal position throughout. In the introduction, the writer outlines the opposing perspectives and clearly states their own belief. Main body paragraphs present relevant and extended ideas, such as the impact of marketing on children with the supporting example of Chile, as well as counterarguments concerning personal responsibility and sedentary lifestyles. Ideas are well-extended and supported, though there is a slight tendency to over-generalise regarding the direct link between advertising and obesity. The response fully satisfies the criteria for addressing the prompt completely, maintaining a consistent viewpoint from beginning to end.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The essay demonstrates a clear logical organisation and progression throughout. Each paragraph has a distinct central topic, moving smoothly from the introduction to the balanced body paragraphs and the well-considered conclusion. Cohesive devices are used flexibly and appropriately to guide the reader through the arguments, as seen in transition phrases like 'Those who support a ban', 'On the other hand', and 'In my opinion'. Paragraphing is used sufficiently and appropriately, separating the distinct elements of the prompt effectively. While referencing is generally clear, occasional minor lapses in cohesive flow prevent the response from achieving a higher band.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.5

The writer uses a sufficient range of vocabulary that allows for some flexibility and precision in discussing the topic. There are successful attempts to use less common and topic-specific lexical items, such as 'impressionable', 'celebrity endorsements', 'calorie-dense food', and 'persuasive intent'. However, there are some occasional word-choice and collocation inaccuracies, such as 'the problem for this is advertising' instead of 'the cause of this is advertising' and 'does not accounted for' instead of 'does not account for'. Additionally, minor spelling errors like 'prespectives' and 'adverstisment' occur, though these do not impede communication and reflect a solid mid-level performance.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

The response employs a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating control over relative clauses and conditional structures. There are frequent error-free sentences, particularly in the well-constructed body paragraphs. However, a number of persistent errors in grammar and punctuation remain, such as awkward phrasing in 'advertising of junk food and should be banned', subject-verb agreement issues ('adverstisment had played'), and article omissions. Despite these occasional errors in grammar, the meaning is always clear and communication is rarely impeded, placing the grammatical performance solidly within this band.

See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.