Issue写作范文详细解析.docx
《Issue写作范文详细解析.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《Issue写作范文详细解析.docx(10页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
Issue写作范文详细解析
Issue写作范文详细解析
给大家整理了Issue写作范文详细解析,快来一起学习吧。
下面就和大家分享,来欣赏一下吧。
Issue写作范文详细解析
Issue
Thereputationofanyonewhoissubjectedtomediascrutinywill
eventuallybediminished.
观点陈述型作文/[题目]
被置于媒体审视下的任何人,其名誉终将受毁损。
SampleEssay
Theintensityoftodaysmediacoveragehasbeengreatlymagnifiedbythe
sheernumberandtypesofmediaoutletsthatareavailabletoday.Intense
competitionforthemostrevealingphotographsandthelatestinformationona
subjecthasturnedevenminormediaeventsintoso-calledmediafrenzies.
Reportersareforcedbythenatureofthecompetitiontopryeverdeeperforan
angleonastorythatnooneelsehasbeenabletouncover.Withthistypeof
mediacoverage,itdoesbecomemoreandmorelikelythatanyonewhoissubjected
toitwillhavehisorherreputationtarnished,asnoindividualisperfect.
Everyonemakesmistakes.Theadvancesintechnologyhavemademuchinformation
easilyandinstantaneouslyavailable.Technologyhasalsomadeiteasiertodig
furtherthaneverbeforeintoapersonspast,increasingthepossibilitythat
thesubjectsreputationmaybeharmed.
[范文正文]
当今媒体报道的力度,由于当今时代所能获得的媒体渠道那前所未有的数量和种类,从而被极大地增强。
围绕着对最具暴露性的图片及对某一题材最新信息所展开的竞争,使哪怕是次要的媒体事件也转变为所谓的媒体疯狂.由于竞争的本质,记者们被迫就某一项报道作深度采访,以其窥探到一个任何其他人都无法揭示的视角。
随着这类媒体报道的出现,任何被置于媒体报道之下的人,其名誉越来越有可能被玷污,因为金无赤金,人无完人.每个人都有可能犯错误。
技术进步使大量的信息在第一瞬间便被轻易获取。
技术也使媒体得以比以往任何时候更深入地去挖掘一个人的过去,从而更增加了当事人名誉受损的可能性。
Theabovestatementismuchtoobroad,however.Anyonecoversallpeople
allovertheworld.Therearepeoplewhosereputationshaveonlybeenenhanced
bymediascrutiny.Therearealsopeoplewhosereputationswerealreadysopoor
thatmediascrutinycouldnotpossiblydiminishitanyfurther.Theremayvery
wellbepeoplethathavedonenothingwronginthepast,atleastthatcanbe
discoveredbythemedia,whosereputationscouldnotbediminishedbymedia
scrutiny.Tobroadlystatethatanyonesubjectedtomediacoveragewillhave
hisorherstatussulliedimpliesthateveryonesreputationworldwideis
susceptibletodamageunderanytypeofmediascrutiny.Whataboutchildren,
particularlynewbornchildren?
Whataboutthosepeoplewhosepastisentirely
unknown?
然则,上述陈述涵盖面过于宽泛。
任何人涵盖了世界上所有的人。
有些人的名誉反而会因为媒体的聚焦而陡然显赫起来。
也有些人,其名声早就如此之糟糕,以致于媒体的聚焦再也无法让它受到更坏的毁损。
笼统地陈述受媒体报道的任何人均会使其地位被玷污,这暗示着全球每个人的名声在任何种类的媒体聚焦下均易于遭诟病。
那么,对于天真无辜的孩子们,尤其新生婴儿,情况会如何?
对于那些其过去根本无人知晓的人来说,情况又会是什么样呢?
Anotherproblemwithsuchabroadstatementisthatitdoesnotdefinethe
particularlevelofmediascrutiny.Certainlytherearedifferentlevelsof
mediacoverage.Doesmerelythementionofonesnameinanewspaperconstitute
mediascrutiny?
Whataboutthecoverageofasingleeventinsomeoneslife,for
exampleaweddingorthebirthofababy?
Isthemediacoverageoftheheroic
deathofafirefighterorpoliceofficerinthelineofdutyevergoingto
diminishthatpersonsreputation?
Itseemshighlyunlikelythatinthese
examples,althoughthesepeoplemayhavebeensubjectedtomediascrutiny,these
individualsreputationsareundamagedandpotentiallyenhancedbysuch
exposure.
对于这样一项笼统的陈述而言,它的另一个问题是没能明晰界定媒体聚焦的具体程度。
媒体的报道毫无疑问存在程度上的差别。
只在报纸上提及一个人的名字,是否算作媒体聚焦?
对某人一生中单独一次事件(如婚礼或孩子出生)的报道这也算媒介聚焦吗?
媒体对消防队员或警官因公而死的英雄壮举进行报道,难道也会毁损该人的名声吗?
在这些实例中,其名声受损的事情极不可能发生。
虽然这些人可能被置于媒体审视之下,但其名声却会完好无损,且潜在地可因这些披露而得以提高。
Withoutadoubt,therearemanyexamplesofindividualswhosereputations
havebeendiminishedbymediascrutiny.ThemediasuncoveringofformerU.S.
PresidentBillClintonsaffairwithMonicaLewinskywillmostlikelyovershadow
theentireeightyearsofhisadministration.BasketballsuperstarMichael
Jordanssterlingreputationhasbeentarnishedmorethanoncebythemedia;
firstbymediacoverageofhisgamblinghabits,thenmostrecently(andina
muchmoreharmfulmanner)bynewsreportsofhismaritalinfidelitiesandthe
divorcefromhiswifeofthirteenyears.Fameandfortunecanturnanordinary
individualintoamediatargetwherereporterswillstopatalmostnothingto
digupdirtthatwillsellmorenewspapersorenticemoreviewerstowatcha
televisionprogram.ItcouldevenbearguedthatmediascrutinykilledPrincess
Dianaashercarspedawayfromtheprivacy-invadingcamerasofreportersin
Paris.Thereisnodoubtthattherearealargenumberofpeoplewhohavebeen
hurtinonewayoranotherbyparticularlyintensemediascrutiny.
毫无疑问,也有许多例子能证明一个人的名声会被媒体审视所毁损。
媒体对美国前总统BillClinton与Monica
Lewinsky的风流韵事的揭露极有可能会将其八年的执政生涯置于阴影之中。
超级篮球明星Michael
Jordan一世英名也被媒体不止一次地玷污,首先是被有关其赌习的媒体报道,其次是最近——且以一种更具致命性伤害的方式——被有关他婚姻不忠以及与其结婚13年的妻子分道扬镳的报道。
当媒体记者不择手段去挖掘某些可促使其报纸销量大增的猛料时,或去诱惑更多的观众观看某一电视节目时,名和利就会将一个普通人转变为媒体追踪的目标。
我们甚至可以提出这样一种论点,即正是媒体的审视将Diana王妃置于死地,随着她的汽车去竭力逃脱巴黎街头的记者们那侵犯隐私的相机镜头。
毫无疑问,肯定有许多人被极其强烈的媒体聚焦以一种方式或另一种方式所伤害。
Insummary,itseemsimpossiblethatforeverypersonthatissubjectedto
mediascrutiny,hisorherreputationwilleventuallybediminished.Millionsof
peoplearementionedinthemediaeverydayyetstillmanagetogoabouttheir
livesunhurtbythemedia.Normalindividualsthataresubjectedtomedia
scrutinycanhavetheirreputationeitherenhancedordamageddependingonthe
circumstancessurroundingthemediacoverage.Thelikelihoodofadiminished
reputationfromthemediarisesproportionallywiththelevelofnotorietythat
anindividualpossessesandtheoutrageousnessofthatpersonsbehavior.The
lengthoftimeinthespotlightcanalsobeadeterminingfactor,asthelonger
thepersonisexaminedinthemedia,thegreaterthepossibilitythatdamaging
informationwillbediscoveredorthattheindividualwilldosomethingto
disparagehisorherreputation.Buttobroadlystatethatmediascrutinywill
diminishanyonesreputationistooverstatethedistinctpossibilitythat,
givenalongenoughtimeandacertainlevelofintensityofcoverage,themedia
maydamageapersonsreputation.
(766words)
归纳而言,对于每个被置于媒体审视的人来说,其名声将最终受到毁损似乎并不可能。
每天,有数百万人被媒体提到,但他们仍设法我行我素,不为媒体所伤害。
被置于媒体审视之下的普通人,其名声或可得到提高,或可蒙受毁损,取决于围绕着媒体报道的具体情况。
一个人的名声受媒体毁损的可能性,与所其拥有的臭名昭著的程度,及其行为的令人厌恶程度成正比。
受媒体关注的时间长短同样也是一个决定性因素,因为一个人被媒体审视的时间越长,于他名声不利的信息越有可能被抖落出来,或者该人越有可能去做出某些于其名声不利的事情。
但只是笼统地陈述媒体的审视终将毁掉一个人的名声,即是过分夸大这样一种显著的可能性,即在足够长的时间和一度程度的报道力度这两个条件下,媒体是有可能毁掉一个人的名声的。
Issue写作范文详细解析
Topic
Thefollowingisalettertotheeditorofanenvironmentalmagazine:
The
declineinthenumbersofamphibiansworldwideclearlyindicatestheglobal
pollutionofwaterandair.TwostudiesofamphibiansinYosemiteNationalPark
inCaliforniaconfirmmyconclusion.In1915thereweresevenspeciesof
amphibiansinthepark,andtherewereabundantnumbersofeachspecies.
However,in1992therewereonlyfourspeciesofamphibiansobservedinthe
park,andthenumbersofeachspeciesweredrasticallyreduced.Thedeclinein
Yosemitehasbeenblamedontheintroductionoftroutintotheparkswaters,
whichbeganin1920(troutareknowntoeatamphibianeggs).Butthe
introductionoftroutcannotbetherealreasonfortheYosemitedeclinebecause
itdoesnotexplaintheworldwidedecline.
SampleEssay
Inthisargument,thewriteroftheletterconcludesthatglobalpollution
ofwaterandairhascausedadeclineinthenumberofamphibiansworldwide.To
supporthisorherconclusion,thewritercitestheresultsoftwostudies,
seventy-fiveyearsapart,thatpurportedlyshowthatthenumberofamphibiansin
oneparkinCalifornia,YosemiteNationalPark,havedrasticallydeclined.
Additionally,thewritercastsasideagivenreasonforthedecline,stating
thattheintroductionoftrouttothepark(whoareknowntoeatamphibianeggs)
doesnotexplaintheworldwidedeclineinthenumberofamphibians.This
argumentdefiessimplelogicandsuffersfromseveralcriticalfallacies.
Firstofall,theargumentisbasedononlytwostudiesinonespecific
partoftheworld,YosemiteNationalParkinCalifornia.Itisimpossibleto
pinpointaworldwidetheoryforthedeclineofamphibiansbasedonanynumberof
studiesinonlyonespecificlocationintheworld-thespecificvarietiesof
amphibians,geographicalconditionsandotherlocationspecificvariables
prohibitsuchasweepinggeneralization.Oneveryspecificlocationcannotbe
usedasamodelforallotherlocations,evenwithinoneparticularcountry,let
alonetheentireworld.Thewriterprovidesnoevidencedwhatsoeverthatlinks
theYosemitestudywithanypurportedeffectsanywhereelseintheglobal
environment.
Secondly,thetwoseparatestudiesweredoneseventy-fiveyearsapart.
Thereisnoevidencethatthetwostudieswereconductedinasimilarmanner
overthesamedurationoftimeorevenoverthesameexactareasofYosemite
NationalPark,orthattheexactsamestudymethodswereused.Forexample,
perhapsthefirststudylastedoveranentireyearandwasconductedby
twenty-fiveexpertsinamphibiousbiology,resultinginthefindingofseven
speciesofamphibiansinabundantnumbers.Bycontrast,perhapsthesecondstudy
wasconductedoveraperiodofoneweekbyalonehighschoolstudentasa
schoolscienceproject.Thewriteroffersnobasisonwhichtocomparethetwo
studies,leavingitopenastowhetherthetwoaretrulycomparableintheir
breadth,scopeandexpertise.
Finally,thewriternotesthatthedeclineintheamphibianpopulationhas
beenblamedontheintroductionoftroutintotheparkswatersin1920,but
thendismissesthatargumentonthepurelyspeciousbasisthatitdoesnot
explaintheworldwidedecline.Thispartoftheargumentblithelydismissesthe
veryrelevantfactthattroutareknowntoeatamphibianeggs.Thisattemptto
proveanegativeisthelastresortofthoseinsearchofsomevainattemptto
provethetruthofthematterthattheyareasserting.Itisbasically
impossibletoproveanegative;thisisanattempttoshifttheburdenof