issue185 背水一战tongwawaw第四次作业－丑闻，写到绝望....终于完成了

tongwawawUID: 2176887

NO.185  媒体
  "Scandals -- whether in politics, academia, or other areas -- can be useful. They focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could."丑闻，不管是政治、学术还是其他领域可能有用.它们吸引人们注意，而这点是任何发言人和改革家都办不到的。
=====================================================
丑闻动摇民心
但是有些丑闻可以促进社会改革
有些丑闻纯粹为了吸引注意力，关注此类丑闻没有益处
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
Can scandals be useful in politics, academia, or other areas? The speaker claims so, because common people are always focusing on problems involved in scandals which neither speaker nor reformer could inform to public. While I concede that scandals are sometimes beneficial to society, undue emphasis on scandals makes no sense to well-being of society and people.

Admittedly, scandals, defined as something related to disgrace, misconduct, and wrongdoings, uncover the inconvenient truth hidden in the shadow of glory which sometimes not only damage the reputation of "the leading actor" in the story but also exert deleterious effect on the society. From Watergate directed by Nixon to Iran-Contra affair led by Reagan government, Nixon at last sent his resignation and Reagan was not supported by most Americans. Moreover, a series of political problems were open to public: abuse of President power, cover-up, misuse of government funds, corruption of administration, illegal contributions, and so forth, all of which, to great extent, shook the concept of democracy held by public who used to be confident and proud of their government. Such scandals invited distrust, dismay, and oscillation in people's mind. And neither speaker nor reformer could exert such effect since they fails to provide vivid and breathtaking "stories" which appeal to most of common people. After all, human beings are cognitive creatures and more willing to accept concrete facts than grey theories.

However, scandals sometimes can benefit the society. Scandals are just phenomena and they act as catalyst that let people begin to contemplate on and ferret out the roots of such disgrace, and then scandals give birth to reform. The case of Enron adds great weight to this point. In fact, aside from personal corruptions, Enron scandal exposed the shortcomings of American public company accounting system and the weakness of government’s responsibility for monitoring business activities, which finally invited an entanglement of accounting and consulting in Enron and gave chance to executives to enrich themselves. After Enron scandal, US government set new accounting standards and enhances their supervision to investigate whether companies and  their accounting firms are conforming to the standards, which, in great sense, exerts beneficial effect on American economy. If not for Enron scandal, there might be more executives taking advantage of flaws of accounting system ,which probably trigger the next financial crisis.

I also concede that some scandals are just intentionally to call attention and completely useless or even harmful. It is a fact that due to the instantaneous access to information provided by mess media, people become more fascinated at personal affairs of celebrities. We should still remember esteemed Diana Princess and President Clinton. When the mess media were continuously pursuing Diana to pry out her love affairs to satisfy the shallow savor of public, we lost Diana and gradually remembered her charity. When people desired to see that President Clinton was summonsed again by court to cope with his sexual scandal and embarrassed by semen-stained dresses, we, as taxpayers, paid considerable financial cost for the curiosity. When we are attracted by such affairs, it is time for us to come to realize how much ponderance we put on social problems, such as unemployment, environment pollution, medical care, or poverty and starvation of Africa people.


To sum up, scandals sometimes can be useful, since they mirror the weakness and flaws of social system and urge the government to perfect its constitution. However, people should not follow the mess media to chase some superficial scandals which could only do harm to the victims and bring no advantage to society.

[ 本帖最后由 tongwawaw 于 2007-2-16 10:51 编辑 ]

最後の使徒UID: 2257608

Can scandals be useful in politics, academia, or other areas? The speaker claims so, because common people are always focusing on problems involved in scandals which neither speaker nor reformer could inform to public. While I concede that scandals are sometimes beneficial to society, undue emphasis on scandals makes no sense to well-being of society and people.(这句重心不明。改为：Conceding that scandals are sometimes beneficial to society, I think since undue emphasis on them will make no sense to well-being of society and people, such a concern should be careful taken.(反面，这个比较符合你这里的意思） 或者Despite the possible damage brought by undue emphasis on scandals, I with a grain of salt approve the author that they can be useful under proper situations.(正面，这个比较符合你的正文部分表达的意思）你的首段中心不够明确，到底是同意还是反对？不当关注引起社会问题只是现象，你对于“丑闻是有用的”这个观点的态度在哪里？二者中间需要你的态度作为逻辑连接。）

Admittedly, scandals, defined as something related to disgrace, misconduct, and wrongdoings, uncover the inconvenient truth hidden in the shadow of glory which sometimes not only damage the reputation of "the leading actor" in the story but also exert deleterious effect on the society.（首段的态度不明确导致你文章的结构出了问题，从第一段最后一句来看你是反面观点，这里却成了正面观点，丑闻有害反而成了让步的部分。） From Watergate directed by Nixon to Iran-Contra affair led by Reagan government, Nixon at last sent his resignation and Reagan was not supported by most Americans.（两个例子分成两句说，这样表述有些混乱. 这个例子也缺乏展开，之后有什么后果了？社会经济下降？犯罪率升高？政府效率低下？而且水门也很难说是undue emphasis吧，这里举的例子需要斟酌） Moreover, a series of political problems were open to public: abuse of President power, cover-up, misuse of government funds, corruption of administration, illegal contributions, and so forth, all of which, to great extent, shook the concept of democracy held by public who used to be confident and proud of their government. Such scandals invited distrust, dismay, and oscillation in people's mind. And neither speaker nor reformer could exert such effect since they fails to provide vivid and breathtaking "stories" which appeal to most of common people. （作者的意思是说丑闻那些好处reformer办不到，这里你却在说丑闻这些坏处reformer办不到，论证这一点有什么意义么？对你的中心论点没有多大意义的） After all, human beings are cognitive creatures and more willing to accept concrete facts than grey theories.（what's concrete facts? 需要联系丑闻把这句充分利用，现在这句显得没有上下文，它要解释什么？）
……………………

To sum up, scandals sometimes can be useful, since they mirror the weakness and flaws of social system and urge the government to perfect its constitution. However, people should not follow the mess media to chase some superficial scandals which could only do harm to the victims and bring no advantage to society.

时间有限我只改了前面的部分
文章主要问题是观点态度不明确，导致论证方向不明确，到底是+还是－在全文的论证中缺乏统一性，看下来不知道你想说的是什么，这样的写法在Issue写作中是大忌。一般采用让步+正面论证*2的三段式不是没有道理的，因为这样才能让文章中心明确。
建议在写之前先确定好提纲，推敲下分论点是不是能支持主论点，该怎么支持主论点，自己之后该怎么论证怎么展开。