Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457): Topic: Media and communication – Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, for revision and practice on this content. They are not reproduced past-paper questions, and they do not replicate the exam’s exact structure, question count or mark tariffs – examination boards hold copyright in their own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers from your board or school.

These questions use the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025). They take the topic “Media and communication” from the section 3 topic list. They practise the section 2 and 4 skills: source-based questions like Component 1 (Written Exam), plus planning for Component 2 (Individual Report) and Component 3 (Team Project). Topic knowledge is not assessed (“Knowledge of content is not assessed in this syllabus”), so answer from the sources.

Links: subject hub, 0457 checklist, study guide, revision notes.

All places, people, organisations and figures below are fictional.

Source A – original text written for Marlbridge. Editorial in the Ardenby Courier, a local newspaper in the fictional town of Ardenby.

The Ardenby Courier has reported on this town for 92 years. Last year we cut our print edition from daily to once a week, because advertisers who used to fill our pages now pay online platforms instead. Since then, three council meetings have taken place with no reporter in the room. If the council stops buying space for its public notices, the Courier will close within two years, and nobody will be watching how your money is spent. Every town deserves a proper newspaper.

Source B – original text written for Marlbridge. Statement by an Ardenby councillor.

Public notices in the Courier cost the council 38,000 a year. That is 40% of our whole communications budget of 95,000. Posting the same notices on the council website and social media pages costs almost nothing. Young people don’t read newspapers. Public money should pay for services, not prop up a private business.

Source C – original text written for Marlbridge. An online survey shared on the Ardenby Youth Council’s social media page. Question: “What is your main source of local news?” 250 respondents aged 14 and over.

Age group	Social media	Local newspaper	Local radio	Word of mouth	Total
14-24	52	4	8	16	80
25-59	44	22	28	16	110
60+	9	27	18	6	60
All	105	53	54	38	250

Note: residents aged 14-24 make up 15% of Ardenby’s population aged 14 and over; residents aged 60+ make up 30%.

Source D – original text written for Marlbridge. Two views on a proposal in the fictional country of Velmora: a 2% levy on the online advertising income of large platforms, paid into an independent fund for local journalism.

Velmora Association of Local Publishers: Platforms earn advertising money from attention that local news helps to create, while local papers close. A levy returns a small share to the communities that lost their reporters. In neighbouring Ostria, a similar fund has paid for 40 new local reporters since it began. An independent panel, not ministers, would decide who receives the money.

Velmora Small Business Forum: Platforms will pass the levy on to the small businesses that buy their adverts, so shopkeepers will pay for newspapers they may never read. Any fund needs someone to decide what counts as “real news”, and whoever decides holds power over the press. Everyone knows a levy like this is just a tax on success.

Questions

1. Identify one fact and one prediction in Source A. [2]

2. Explain what is meant by a vested interest, using one example from Source A or Source B. [3]

3. Source B states: “Young people don’t read newspapers.” Identify the type of statement this is, and explain, using Source C, why it is weak evidence. [3]

4. Read Source C.

(a) Identify the percentage of all respondents who named social media as their main source of local news. [1] (b) The Youth Council claims: “Most Ardenby residents now get their local news from social media.” Explain two weaknesses in the evidence for this claim. [4] (c) Suggest how this claim could be tested more reliably. [4]

5. Explain why the writers of Source A and Source B have different perspectives on whether the council should keep paying for notices in the Courier. [4]

6. Using Sources A, B and C, explain two causes of the Courier’s problems and one possible consequence for Ardenby residents. [6]

7. Analyse how the writer of Source A uses language to persuade the reader. [4]

8. Read Source D. Evaluate the two arguments and make a reasoned judgement about which is stronger. [12]

9. Ardenby Council is considering three courses of action:

• Action 1: keep paying 38,000 a year for notices in the Courier.
• Action 2: move all notices online and stop paying the Courier.
• Action 3: stop paying the Courier. Instead, spend 12,000 a year on a free monthly printed notice sheet written by council staff, handed out at the library, pharmacy and bus station, with the same notices online.

Using all the sources, assess which action would be most effective in keeping Ardenby residents informed about local decisions. Explain your judgement with reasons and evidence. [16]

10. A student choosing Media and communication for the Individual Report proposes the title “Fake news”. Explain why this is not yet a suitable title, and write an improved global research question. [4]

11. A team chooses the topic Media and communication. Their local issue is that many older residents miss council news that is posted only online. Suggest an action the team could take, how they could evidence it, and how they could measure its success. [6]

Answers

1. Fact: the Courier cut its print edition to once a week last year, or three council meetings had no reporter present [1]. Prediction: the Courier “will close within two years” [1]. [2] Examiner insight: Quote the exact words from the source; a paraphrase can blur the line between a fact and a claim.

2. A vested interest is when a person or group stands to gain or lose from the outcome [1]. The editor in Source A gains income if the council keeps buying notice space [1]. This may lead the editor to overstate the harm of closure (“nobody will be watching”), so the claim needs independent checking [1]. [3] Examiner insight: Naming the interest is not enough; the third mark comes from explaining how it might shape what the source says.

3. It is a generalisation, because it applies to all young people [1]. It is given with no evidence or source [1]. Source C shows 4 of the 80 respondents aged 14-24 (5%) named the paper as their main source, so “don’t read” is too absolute [1]. [3] Examiner insight: Use the numbers from the source to test the statement; a general comment that “some young people do read papers” earns less.

4. (a) 105 out of 250 = 42% [1]. [1] (b) 42% is less than half, so it is not “most” [1]. It is the largest single answer, but that is not a majority [1]. The survey was shared online on a social media page, so people who use social media were more likely to see it [1]. Respondents aged 14-24 are 32% of the sample but only 15% of the town, and 65% of them named social media, so the overall figure is probably too high [1]. [4] (c) Use a sample whose age groups match the town’s population [1]. Collect responses offline too, such as door to door, so non-users of social media are included [1]. Ask about every source people use and how often, not only their “main” source [1]. Compare with independent data, such as the Courier’s sales or council website visits [1]. [4] Examiner insight: “Suggest” answers gain marks for specific methods tied to the weakness you found, not for “use a bigger sample” alone.

5. The editor (Source A) thinks the council should keep paying [1], because the paper depends on that income and the editor values independent reporting of council meetings [1]. The councillor (Source B) thinks the council should stop paying [1], because their role is managing a stretched budget (notices take 40% of it) and they believe online notices reach people more cheaply; as someone the paper reports on, they also have a different stake in scrutiny [1]. [4] Examiner insight: For each perspective, give the position and the reason the writer holds it; the reason is where most marks are.

6. Cause 1: advertising money has moved to online platforms (Source A) [1], which cut the paper’s income, so it reduced its print edition to weekly [1]. Cause 2: fewer people use the paper as their main source, especially younger residents (5% of 14-24 respondents in Source C) [1], so its audience, and its value to advertisers and the council, is shrinking [1]. Consequence: council meetings may go unreported, as three already have [1]. Residents, especially the 60+ group (75% of whom rely mainly on paper or radio), may then know less about local decisions, and those decisions face less public scrutiny [1]. [6] Examiner insight: Link each cause to an effect with “so” or “which means”; a list of unconnected points is description, not analysis.

7. “Nobody will be watching how your money is spent” is an exaggeration that appeals to fear [1]. “Your money” makes the reader feel personally affected [1]. “92 years” appeals to tradition, suggesting the paper is part of the town’s identity [1]. “Every town deserves a proper newspaper” states a value as if it were obvious, with no evidence, and “proper” suggests online alternatives are not real news [1]. [4] Examiner insight: Each mark needs the quoted words and their effect on the reader.

8. The real exam marks extended answers using levels of response, not point by point. These are indicative points.

Velmora Association of Local Publishers, strengths: clear reasoning linking platform income to the decline of local news [1]; it gives evidence, the 40 new reporters in Ostria [1]; it answers an obvious objection by saying an independent panel would decide [1]. Weaknesses: it has a vested interest, because its members would receive the money [1]; the Ostria figure has no source, comes from a different country and has no comparison (how many reporters were lost, and at what cost?) [1]; the claim that platform income comes “from attention that local news helps create” is assumed, not supported [1]. Velmora Small Business Forum, strengths: it identifies a plausible consequence, with costs passed on to small businesses [1]; it raises a fair point about who decides what counts as news, linked to press freedom [1]. Weaknesses: “will pass the levy on” is a prediction with no evidence [1]; “Everyone knows” is a generalisation, and “a tax on success” is loaded language rather than reasoning [1]; its members may pay more, so it too has a vested interest [1]. Judgement: the publishers’ argument is stronger because it offers evidence and responds to a counter-argument, although its evidence needs checking [1]. [12] Examiner insight: Judge the quality of each argument (evidence, reasoning, language); agreeing or disagreeing with the levy itself earns nothing.

9. As in Question 8, the real exam uses levels of response; these are indicative points.

Action 1: it keeps the paper alive, since Source A predicts closure without the notices [1]. It reaches print readers: 45% of 60+ respondents name the paper as their main source [1]. The Courier also reports on meetings, which a notice sheet cannot do [1]. But it costs 38,000, which is 40% of the communications budget (Source B) [1]. The closure prediction comes from a source with a vested interest, so it may be overstated [1]. Only 21.2% of all respondents name the paper as their main source [1]. Action 2: it costs almost nothing (Source B) [1] and reaches the 42% who rely on social media, including 65% of 14-24s [1]. But the Source C figure is probably inflated by the online sampling, so online reach may be lower than it looks [1]. Residents aged 60+ are 30% of the town, and 75% of 60+ respondents rely mainly on paper or radio, so many could be left out [1]. If the Courier closes, nobody independent reports on meetings [1]. Action 3: it saves 26,000 a year compared with Action 1 [1] and reaches both print readers and online users [1]. But council staff write it, so it informs people about decisions without independently scrutinising them [1]. Judgement: Action 3 is most effective for keeping residents informed, because it reaches both groups at lower cost [1]. It would be stronger with some support for independent reporting, and the judgement needs better data than Source C [1]. [16] Examiner insight: Use every source and end with a clear choice; weighing actions against each other lifts an answer to the top level.

10. “Fake news” is a topic, not a question, so it cannot be answered or reach a conclusion [1]. It does not name an issue that divides opinion, which the syllabus requires [1]. Improved: “Should governments have the power to order online platforms to remove false news?” [1] This divides opinion (protecting the public against free expression) and allows national and global perspectives, such as a national government and an international press freedom group [1]. [4] Examiner insight: A good research question can be answered “yes, because” or “no, because” and still leave room for other views.

11. Action: weekly “council news” drop-in sessions at the library, where the team prints and explains the latest notices [1]. It is realistic and targets the people named in the issue [1]. Evidence of Action: photographs of the sessions and copies of the notices produced during the action [1], not evidence of research or initial meetings to discuss the project, which the syllabus says Evidence of Action should not include [1]. Measure: ask attendees before and after whether they knew about specific recent council decisions [1], and count returning visitors, so the team measures effect, not just effort [1]. [6] Examiner insight: “We handed out 200 leaflets” measures effort; a before-and-after check of what people know measures success.

Where marks are usually lost

• Using your own media knowledge instead of the sources.
• Calling a source biased without quoting it or naming the interest.
• Ignoring how a survey was done, such as an online-only sample.
• Mixing up percentages of one group with percentages of all respondents.
• Stating a perspective without the reason it is held.
• Spotting persuasive language without its effect.
• Agreeing with an argument instead of judging how well it is argued.
• Assessing actions one by one without comparing them or reaching a judgement.
• Team Project plans with no measure of success.

Next steps

Try the general Global Perspectives practice, Individual Report practice and Team Project practice. Find your weaker skills with our diagnostics, or Book a free trial class.

Official syllabus

Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025). Topic list: section 3; assessment objectives: section 2; Component 1, 2 and 3 details and command words: section 4.