Band 8 model answer

Technology firms now harvest staggering quantities of personal information from those who use their services. Some regard this as a perilous development; others insist that consumers are amply compensated by the conveniences they receive. This essay considers both perspectives before presenting my own.

Those disquieted by data collection have well-grounded misgivings. The sheer breadth of information these companies amass, encompassing our movements, purchases, correspondence and predilections, affords them a disquieting intimacy with our private lives. Such data can be marshalled to manipulate what we see and buy, traded to third parties without our informed consent, or laid bare in breaches that expose millions to fraud. Once gathered, moreover, this information is notoriously resistant to control or erasure.

Their opponents counter that the bargain confers tangible benefits. The free services on which hundreds of millions depend daily, from search engines to social platforms and digital maps, are bankrolled precisely by the data users surrender. Personalisation, too, renders these tools genuinely more serviceable, surfacing pertinent content, filtering spam and recalling our preferences. Seen thus, parting with a measure of data is a fair levy for utilities that would otherwise be costly or unattainable.

My own conviction is that the benefits are real but presently extracted on inequitable terms. The grievance lies not in data collection per se but in the opacity and absence of choice that envelop it. Users seldom comprehend what they assent to, and meaningful alternatives are vanishingly rare. Robust regulation guaranteeing transparent consent and authentic control would let the advantages persist while curbing the abuses.

In conclusion, although data collection furnishes services we prize, I believe it must be far more rigorously regulated, so that convenience is no longer purchased at the expense of our privacy.