Clearly state your agreement or disagreement with the premise in your introduction and maintain this stance consistently. To acknowledge the opposing view without undermining your argument, use concessionary phrases like 'While some may argue that...' or 'It is undeniable that...', immediately followed by a robust counter-argument or a stronger point supporting your main position.

Consider using examples like the 'moral panic' phenomenon, where sensationalised crime reporting (e.g., youth crime waves in the UK) inflates public fear despite stable or falling crime rates, leading to disproportionate policy reactions. Alternatively, discuss the concept of 'trial by media' in high-profile cases, where intense coverage (e.g., the Amanda Knox case) can prejudice public opinion and potentially impact legal proceedings.

The most common mistake is discussing media influence generally without specifically linking it to 'crime reporting' or failing to consistently evaluate whether this influence constitutes a 'negative development.' To avoid this, ensure every argument you present directly addresses how media's increased role in reporting crime specifically impacts society negatively (or positively, if you disagree with the premise), rather than just listing general media effects.

For an opinion essay, employ topic sentences that clearly signpost the main idea of each paragraph and reinforce your overall stance. Use transition phrases like 'Furthermore, this heightened influence often leads to...' or 'Consequently, the public perception of crime is skewed because...' to connect ideas logically and maintain a cohesive argument.

Examiners look for a nuanced discussion that goes beyond a simple 'yes' or 'no' to the negative development. A band 8-9 response will critically analyse how media's influence has grown in crime reporting, providing specific examples, and then offer a sophisticated argument for why this is or is not a negative development, perhaps distinguishing between different types of media or reporting styles.