题目内容
Since the buildup to the war with Iraq, British Prime Minister Tony Blair has taken it on the chin from the media. The British media ordinarily grill politicians, but in this case they have been particularly feisty, empowered by opinion polls that showed most Brits wanted nothing to do with invading Iraq. ①Until now the American media, which by nature are less aggressive than their British counterparts but probably are taking a lead from polls and politicians that supported the administration’s war stance, have gone relatively easy on President Bust. But this week the media have hit the administration hard with questions about Bush’s State of the Union statement that Iraq was acquiring uranium from Niger, one of the administration’s justifications for war. And with the 2004 campaign heating up and Bush’s approval rating dipping, his administration is being grilled harder than it has been in months. Experts say the questioning will get sharper as summer progresses. ②"That Democrats are just now ’beginning to get traction’ on the justification for the war is an example of how differently politics are played in the U.S.A. than they are in Britain"says Martin Turner, Washington bureau chief of the BBC. The respondents have been highly critical of the war and suspicious of administration claims that weapons of mass destruction exist in Iraq. In Britain, whereas prime minister must defend himself every week before Parliament, the media take a "much more muscular approach to grilling politicians", Turner says. Here, the BBC is often regarded as a rather impolite member of the Washington press corps. "We tend to ask questions in a different way than they are asked on the Sunday political programs." In London, Michael Goldfarb, senior correspondent for National Public Radio affiliate WBUR in Boston, says his British counterparts talk about "how astonishing the ride has been for Bush" and how the Bush administration "manages the news like it’s nobody’s business. Here they call Blair Bush’s poodle (狮子狗)". But then again, he says, British media "simply don’t hold to the American notion of objectivity and certainly not impartiality". ABC anchor Peter Jennings, who reported from London in the 1970s and 1980s, says he has "always been struck by how mu ch more aggressive the British press is". They’re simply much more aggressive. In the U.S.A., "there is no doubt that the press is aware of the influence of a powerful president, and the press is aware to some extent that it is in competition for public opinion, so there is always stress between a powerful president and the press." But in the past week, with debate over the war heating up, it led several of Jennings’ World News Tonight broadcasts. "Our reporters sense some deep concern about what is happening.\ The passage is primarily concerned with ______.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Perhaps only a small boy training to be a wizard at the Hogwarts School of magic could cast a spell so powerful as to create the biggest book launch ever. Wherever in the world the clock strikes midnight on June 20th, his followers will flock to get their paws on one of more than 10m copies of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Bookshops will open in the middle of the night and delivery firms are drafting in extra staff and bigger trucks. Related toys, games, DVDs and other merchandise will be everywhere. There will he no escaping Potter mania. Yet Mr. Potter’s world is a curious one, in which things are often not what they appear. While an excitable media (here by including The Economist, happy to support such a fine example of globalization)is helping to hype the launch of J.K. Rowling’s fifth novel, about the most adventurous thing that the publishers (Scholastic in America and Britain’s Bloomsbury)have organized is a reading by Ms.Rowling in London’s Royal Albert Hall to be broadcast as a live web cast. Hollywood, which owns everything else to do with Harry Potter, says it is doing even less. Incredible as it may seem, the guardians of the brand say that, to protect the Potter franchise, they are trying to maintain a low profile, well, relatively low. Ms. Rowling signed a contract in 1998 with Warner Brothers, part of AOL Time Warner, giving the studio exclusive film, licensing and merchandising rights in return for what now appears to have been a steal: some $500,000. Globally, the first four Harry Potter books have sold some 200m copies in 55 languages; the two movies have grossed over $1.8 billion at the box office. This is a stunning success by any measure, especially as Ms. Rowling has long demanded that Harry Potter should not be over-commercialized. In line with her wishes, Warner says it is being extraordinarily careful, at least by Hollywood standards, about what it licenses and to whom. It imposed tough conditions on Coca-Cola, insisting that no Harry Potter images should appear on cans, and is now in the process of making its licensing programme even more restrictive. Coke may soon be considered too mass market to carry the brand at all. The deal with Warner ties much of the merchandising to the films alone. There are no officially sanctioned products relating to Harry Potter and Order of the Phoenix; nor yet for Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, the film of the third book, which is due out in June 2004. "Warner agrees that Ms. Rowling’s creation is a different sort of commercial property, one with long-term potential that could be damaged by a typical Hollywood marketing blitz," says Diane Nelson, the studio’s global brand manager for Harry Potter. "It is vital," she adds, "that with more to come, readers of the books are not alienated. The evidence from our market research is that enthusiasm for the property by fans is not waning.\ What can we infer from "there will be no escaping Potter mania" (Line 7, Par
①Many people seem to think that science fiction is typified by the covers of some of the old pulp magazines" the Bug Eyed Monster. embodying every trait and feature that most people find repulsive is ahout to grab, and presumably ravish, a sweet, blonde curvaceous scantily clad Earth girl. This is unfortunate because it demeans and degrades a worthwhile and even important literary endeavor. In contrast to this unwarranted stereotype, science fiction rarely emphasizes sex, and when it does, it is more discreet than other contemporary fiction. Instead, the basic interest of science fiction lies in the relation between man and his technology and between man and the universe. ②Science fiction is a literature of change and a literature of the future, and while it would be foolish to claim that science fiction is a major literary genre at this time. the aspects of human life that it considers make it well worth reading and studying for no other literary from does quite the same things. What is science fiction To begin, the following definition should be helpful: science fiction is a literary sub-genre which postulates a change (for human beings ) from conditions as we know them and follows the implications of these changes to a conclusion. Although this definition will necessarily he modified and expanded, it covers much of the basic groundwork and provides a point of departure. The first point that science fiction is a literary sub-genre is a very important one, but one which is often overlooked or ignored in most discussions of science fiction. Specifically, science fiction is either a short story or a novel. There are only a few dramas which could be called science fiction, with Karel Capek’s RUR (Rossum’s Universal Robots) being the only one that is well known; the body of poetry that might be labeled science fiction is only slightly larger. ③To say that science fiction is a sub- genre of prose fiction is to say that it has all the basic characteristics and serves, the same basic functions in much the same way as prose fiction in general, that is, it shares a great deal with all other novels and short stories. Everything that can be said about prose fiction, in general, applies to science fiction. Every piece of science fiction, whether short story or novel, must have a narrator, a story, a plot, a setting, characters, language, and theme. And like any prose, the themes of science fiction are concerned with interpreting man’s nature and experience in relation to the world around him. Themes in science fiction are constructed and presented in exactly the same ways that themes are dealt with in any other kind of fiction. They are the result of a particular combination of narrator, story, plot, character, setting, and language. In short, the reasons for reading and enjoying science fiction, and the ways of studying and analyzing it, are basically the same as they would be for any other story or novel. The last sentence of the passage implies that ______.
American dramas and sitcoms (连续剧) would have been candidates for prime time several years ago. But today those programs--though some remain popular- increasingly occupy fringe times slots on foreign networks. Instead, a growing number of shows produced by local broadcasters are on the air at the best times. The shift counters longstanding assumptions that TV shows produced in the United States would continue to overshadow locally produced shows from Singapore to Sicily. The changes are coming at a time when the influence of the United States on_ international affairs has chafed (使恼火) friends and foes, and some people are expressing relief that at least on television American culture is no longer quite the force it once was. "There has always been a concern that the image of the world would be shaped too much by American culture," said Dr. Jo Groebek, director general of the European Institute for the Media, a non-profit group. Given the choice, he adds, foreign viewers often prefer homegrown shows that better reflect local tastes, cultures and historical events. Unlike in the United States, commercial broadcasting in most regions of the world--including Asia, Europe and a lesser extent Latin American, which has a long history of commercial TV--is a relatively recent development. A majority of broadcasters in many countries were either state-owned or state- subsidized for much of the last century. Governments began to relax their control in the 1980’s by privatizing national broadcasters and granting licenses to dozens of new commercial networks. The rise of cable and satellite pay-television increased the spectrum of channels. Relatively inexperienced and often financed on a shoestring, these new commercial stations needed hours of programming fast. The cheapest and easiest way to fill airtime was to buy shows from American studios, and the bidding wars for popular shows were fierce. The big American studios took advantage of that demand by raising prices and forcing foreign broadcasters to buy less popular programs if they wanted access to the best-selling shows and movies. "The studios priced themselves out of prime time," said Harry Evans Sloan, chairman of SBS Broadcasting, a Pan-European broadcaster. Mr. Sloan estimates that over the last decade, the price &American programs has increased fivefold even as the international ratings for these shows have declined. American broadcasters are still the biggest buyers of American-made television shows, accounting for 90% of the $25 billion in 2001 sales. But international sales which totaled $2.5 billion last year often make the difference between a profit and a loss on a show. As the pace of foreign sales slows--the market is now growing at 5% a year, down from the double-digit growth of the 1990’s--studio executives are rethinking production costs. The intervention of governments in the 1980’s resulted in ______.
Look at your watch for just one minute. During that time the population of the world increased by eight-five people. Perhaps you think that isn’t much. In the next hour, more than 5,000 (36) people will be living on this (37) . So it goes, hour after hour. In one day, there are about 120,000 additional mouths to (38) (39) this by 365. What will happen in 100 years This population (40) may be the greatest (41) of the present time. Within the next forty years, the world population may (42) . Can the new frontiers of science meet the needs of the crowded world of tomorrow If the present (43) of population increase continues for the next 600 or 700 years, there will be standing room only. Each person will have between 3 to 10 square feet of space in which to live. (44) .Of course, no one expects such a thing to happen. (45) Actually, (46) so that they cannot move arms and legs, but in an upset balance between population and resources.
微信支付 
支付宝支付