Task Response: You address both views and state a clear position, but the prompt asks whether news should not be reported (a policy stance), whereas you argue it raises awareness. You need to explicitly engage with the idea of censorship/restriction. The example about smartphones is relevant but slightly repetitive.

Coherence & Cohesion: The structure is logical with clear paragraphing. However, cohesive devices are sometimes mechanical ("One the one hand," "One other hand," "To be more exact"). The link between "awareness" and "deciding how to react without hesitation" is asserted rather than fully explained.

Lexical Resource: Good range ("chronic anxiety," "detrimental," "social isolation," "broadens the horizon"). Errors include "violation" (should be crimes/offences), "ncreased" (spelling), and "assume that are not able" (missing subject they).

Grammatical Range & Accuracy: You use complex structures (conditionals, relative clauses) effectively. Frequent minor errors persist: "One the one hand," "One other hand" (should be On the other hand), "assume that are not able" (subject missing), and article issues ("the population," "the high volume").

Key Improvements: 1) Directly address the "ban/restriction" aspect of the prompt. 2) Fix systematic errors: "On the one hand / On the other hand," subject-verb agreement ("assume they are"), and spelling. 3) Develop the "encourages criminals" point from the prompt, which is currently missing.