Issue8: 欢迎砖头!! 自己觉得用词不怎么好.

gre_awUID: 194715

------题目------
8．It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public.
------正文------
There is a public controversy nowadays on the issue of withholding information from the public. Popular views are that political leaders should withhold information from the public, they insist that the information is confidential to the government and can't be open to the public. Others argue that political leaders can not keep the information secret, it is required to make the political affairs supervised by the public in a democratic country. As far as I am concerned, the information should be treated in both ways, sometimes it is better to spread the information while some key information can be withholded temporarily.

First of all, the public has the right to access any information on their interests. In a democratic society, the leaders should decide on the policies they are going to enact after they carry out a poll to all of their citizens to acquire the agreement of the public. In other words, policies and laws should be a representative of most, if not all, citizens. Otherwise this country may be an autocratic one. In the words of philosophers and artists, a country without democracy is like a person without his arms and legs. That is to say, the society can not be developed appropriately, and in some day the society will be overturned by its people. So we can reach that democratic society should open its information to all of its people.

Furthermore, if "the right to know" is often denied by the authority, the society will go back to the primitive society and it is harmful to all the people. I can take China for example, in the spring of 2003, China was suffering from a serious epidemic disease, which is called SARS. At the beginning of this disease, Chinese government concealed the real data and situation because it was afraid to cause the panic of the public. As a result, the government was criticized by the WHO and other institutions around the world and it realized the importance to open the information to the public. The government announced the data and details to its citizens through television, radio and Internet, and the whole society began to place an emphasis of SARS. A month later, the number of deaths and patients decreased rapidly. Based on the truth, the information should not be withholded by the political leaders.

On the other hand, it is necessary for political leaders to withhold some information that is not appropriate to publish at that time. For example, at the experimental stage of a new technology, the failure of each time may be kept from the public because it can bring the negative effect to the whole society. In this case, the public should encourage its people to support the project.

From what has been discussed above, the conclusion can be reached that both the two ways should be utilized to make the society more unified and democratic, citizens have the right to access to the information and government has its right to keep some key information confidential to the public.

花之颜色UID: 187195

There is a public controversy nowadays on the issue of withholding information from the public. Popular views are that political leaders should withhold information from the public, they insist that the information is confidential to the government and can't be open to the public. Others argue that political leaders can not keep the information secret, it is required to make the political affairs supervised by the public in a democratic country. As far as I am concerned, the information should be treated in both ways, sometimes it is better to spread the information while some key information can be withholded temporarily.

First of all, the public has the right to access any information on their interests. In a democratic society, the leaders should decide on the policies they are going to enact after they carry out a poll to all of their citizens to acquire the agreement of the public. In other words, policies and laws should be a representative of most, if not all, citizens代表的是不是应该是全体人民的想法而不是人民本身?. Otherwise this country may be an autocratic one. In the words of philosophers and artists, a country without democracy is like a person without his arms and legs. That is to say, the society can not be developed appropriately, and [U]in [/U] 删掉 some day the society will be overturned by its people. So we can reach that democratic society should open its information to all of its people.

Furthermore, if "the right to know" is often denied by the authority, the society will go back to the [U]primitive society [/U]  原始社会没有知道的权利？貌似那个时候还是比较自由的吧　and it is harmful to all the people. I can take China for example, in the spring of 2003, China was suffering from a serious epidemic disease, which is called SARS. At the beginning of this disease, Chinese government concealed the real data and situation because it was afraid to cause the panic of the public. As a result, the government was criticized by the WHO and other institutions around the world and it realized the importance to open the information to the public. The government announced the data and details to its citizens through television, radio and Internet, and the whole society began to place an emphasis of SARS. A month later, the number of deaths and patients decreased rapidly. Based on the truth, the information should not be withholded by the political leaders.

On the other hand, it is necessary for political leaders to withhold some information that is not appropriate to publish at that time. For example, at the experimental stage of a new technology, the failure of each time may be kept from the public because it can bring the negative effect to the whole society. In this case, the public should encourage its people to support the project.

From what has been discussed above, the conclusion can be reached that both the two ways should be utilized to make the society more unified and democratic, citizens have the right to access to the information and government has its right to keep some key information confidential to the public.

挺通顺的,论证也没啥大的问题,当然也没感觉特别出彩,总之中稍偏上水平.

gre_awUID: 194715

谢谢了, 但怎么才能丰富词汇啊?

naiba369UID: 131655

https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=207761

把上面的链接看一下，3x

sblbaslerUID: 175229

There is a public controversy nowadays on the issue of withholding information from the public.[B]There,among the mass, exists a pop belief that political leaders should withhold information which is confidential to the government and can't be open to the public . Opponents who argue that political leaders can not keep the information secret for the simply reason that it is required to make the political affairs supervised by the public in a democratic country,however, are not rare[/B]  As far as I am concerned, the information should be treated in both ways, sometimes it is better to spread the information while some key information can be withholded temporarily.
[B]其他没什么可说的，就觉得例子举的虽然可以但没什么感觉，要注意把句子写的稍微长一些（力所能及的范围内）[/B]

幸福的老鼠UID: 195110

确实，我也觉得是词语用的不太好。一种平淡的感觉，多背一些文章吧！