The cue card
Describe a time when you received some good news.
You should say:
- what the news was
- when you received it
- who told you
and explain why it was good news for you.
You have one minute to make notes, then speak for one to two minutes.
Band 8–9 sample answer
Written by Abroadway as a model of natural, high-band speaking (not an official IELTS sample).
I'd like to talk about the morning I found out I'd become an uncle, which was about eighteen months ago. My elder sister lives in Toronto with her husband, and she was expecting her first baby. The due date was still almost three weeks away, so nobody in the family was expecting anything to happen yet. I received the news at around four o'clock in the morning, our time.
Because of the time difference, my phone rang in the middle of the night, and when I saw my brother-in-law's name on the screen, my heart sank for a moment, because a call at that hour usually means something has gone wrong. But as soon as I answered, I could hear that he was laughing and crying at the same time. He told me that the baby had decided to arrive early, and that my sister had given birth to a healthy little girl a couple of hours before. A few minutes later, he sent a photo of this tiny, wrinkled face wrapped in a pink blanket, and I must have stared at it for ten minutes.
Then I had the privilege of waking my parents and passing the news on. My mother burst into tears, and my father, who is usually quite reserved, immediately started phoning relatives, even though it wasn't yet dawn. As for why it was such good news, there are a few reasons. Most obviously, it was a huge relief that both mother and baby were safe, especially as the birth had come so early.
But it also meant a great deal to me personally, since my sister and I have always been close, and since she moved abroad I've often felt that we were drifting apart. Becoming an uncle somehow brought us closer again, and we now video call almost every week, so I can watch my niece grow up, even from a distance.
Useful phrases from this answer
- my heart sank
- I suddenly felt worried or afraid
- passing the news on
- telling other people the news you have received
- burst into tears
- suddenly started crying
- drifting apart
- slowly becoming less close to someone
- echo chambers
- spaces, especially online, where people only hear opinions like their own
- a healthy degree of scepticism
- a sensible amount of doubt before believing something
- hold those in power accountable
- make powerful people explain and take responsibility for their actions
- where the line is drawn
- the point that separates what is acceptable from what is not
Part 3 follow-up questions and answers
How do people usually share good news with others nowadays?
These days, I'd say most people share good news through their phones, either by messaging close friends and family directly or by posting it on social media. Within a family, there's often a kind of unwritten order: the people closest to you are told personally, usually with a phone or video call, and only after that does the news go up on Facebook or Instagram for everyone else. In Bangladesh, there's still a strong tradition of sharing sweets with neighbours and relatives when something good happens, such as exam results or a new job. So technology has made sharing instant, but in many cases it exists alongside older customs rather than replacing them.
Why do news programmes report more bad news than good news?
I think it's largely because bad news attracts more attention. People are naturally drawn to stories about danger, conflict or disaster, possibly because being alert to threats helped humans survive in the past. News organisations depend on viewers and clicks, so they tend to prioritise stories that will keep people watching. There's also the argument that the media has a responsibility to report problems, such as corruption or accidents, so that they can be dealt with, whereas good news rarely requires any action. That said, I'd argue the imbalance can give people a distorted, overly negative picture of the world, which isn't healthy either.
How has social media changed the way people get the news?
It has changed things dramatically. Many people, especially younger ones, no longer watch the evening news or buy a newspaper; instead, they come across news while scrolling through their feeds, often in the form of short videos or headlines. The obvious advantage is speed, since events are reported almost as they happen, sometimes by ordinary people who witness them. The downside is that accuracy often suffers. False or misleading stories can spread widely before anyone checks them, and algorithms tend to show people content that matches their existing views, which can create echo chambers. So people may be better informed in terms of quantity, but not necessarily quality.
Do people trust the news less than they used to?
On the whole, I think they do, although it varies a great deal between countries and age groups. One reason is the sheer amount of misinformation online, which has made people suspicious of almost everything they read, including legitimate reporting. Another is that many people feel certain media outlets are biased or influenced by political or business interests. In the past, there were fewer sources, so people tended to rely on a handful of trusted newspapers or channels. Now, with so many competing voices, it's harder to know who to believe. Having said that, a healthy degree of scepticism isn't necessarily a bad thing, as long as it doesn't turn into believing nothing at all.
Should the government have any control over what the news media report?
Generally speaking, I don't think governments should control what the media report, because one of the main functions of journalism is to hold those in power accountable. If a government can decide what's published, it can easily hide its own mistakes or silence criticism. However, I'd accept that some limited regulation can be justified, for instance to stop content that deliberately encourages violence, or to protect people from false and damaging claims. The key question is who decides where the line is drawn. Ideally, that should be an independent body rather than politicians themselves, with clear rules that apply equally to everyone, so that regulation doesn't become a disguise for censorship.
Practise this cue card out loud
Free, no account needed. Use Chrome or Edge with a microphone; you'll get a band estimate for fluency, vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation.
Want the technique behind a strong Part 2? Read the free Speaking lessons.