Back to ISE III English (UK) – Collaborative task

Building Trust in Local Journalism

English speaking scenario

Libby

A bright British English speaker with an approachable, conversational tone.

32 years · female

Practise talking about "Building Trust in Local Journalism" with Libby, your AI speaking avatar. Speak out loud, get instant feedback, and build confidence for your ISE III English – Collaborative task speaking exam.

Start free AI practice

Conversation

We need to work together on this situation: a local news organisation wants to rebuild trust after accusations of bias. What would you like to ask me first?

Good answer:

I would ask what failure would look like, because that tells us what to prevent. In this situation, a local news organisation wants to rebuild trust after accusations of bias. I would ask who is most affected among the people most affected, what has already been tried, and what constraint cannot be ignored. Without that, we might choose a neat solution that does not address the media in practice.

One possible response is publishing corrections and source explanations. What advantages and problems do you see with that idea?

Good answer:

That option has a clear attraction, because people can understand it quickly. Publishing corrections and source explanations could work if the main need is structure and quick implementation. My concern is improving media literacy for confident students while missing those most easily influenced. Before supporting it, I would ask who might avoid it, who pays for it and how we would know whether it improves the situation rather than just making action visible.

Another option is community editorial meetings with residents. How would you compare the two options?

Good answer:

I would compare them by asking which risk is more acceptable. Publishing corrections and source explanations seems stronger where the problem needs clear rules, while community editorial meetings with residents may be stronger where people need confidence, privacy or ownership. I would choose the option that is more likely to produce a fairer result in this situation.

Some people involved may disagree with your preferred option. How would you persuade them or adapt the plan?

Good answer:

I would separate objections about principle from objections about delivery. If their concern was reasonable, I would change the plan rather than treat compromise as weakness. For example, we could pilot the option, publish the review criteria and agree in advance what evidence would make us change direction. For building trust in local journalism, that extra link would make the point more precise.

What final recommendation would you make, and what should happen next?

Good answer:

My final recommendation would be conditional. I would probably choose community editorial meetings with residents if it deals better with improving media literacy for confident students while missing those most easily influenced, but I would keep one practical strength from publishing corrections and source explanations. Next, I would assign responsibility, consult the least heard group and set a short review against a fairer result in this situation.