|
Are scandals instrumental（仪器的？这里是什么意思？）in calling people's attention to some pressing social or political problems, as the speaker maintains? In some respects, I agree that scandals can serve to attract public eyeballs to several pervasive issues. However, in other respects, scandals are counterproductive-- they may distract us from most important social issues. It is difficult to deny that, to some extent, scandals can serve chiefly to call people's attention to some serious societal problems. Consider, for example, the major in my city who was dismissed several years ago because he misused public health funds to renovate his own posh residence（贪污的丑闻，例子不错，如果能补充个政界的前提就更佳了）. This scandal quickly became the headline news in almost any important newspapers in my country- which sparked a new debate about the powers and duties of our public officials. Not only did it attract the masses' attention, but also it forced our government to take actions to reform the system of public finance. Moreover, the general population had become the beneficiary through raising the level of scrutiny to government officials, which, on the other hand, avoided some unnecessary incidences of misappropriation（不是很理解这句的意思）. Therefore, it is clear that scandals do help to call people's attention to some important societal issues（到此issue已出现是第三遍，为了不给阅卷人重复和词汇匮乏的感觉，建议多换表达）, thereby helping people ferret(注意句子的注意) out an appropriate way to solve these headaches. Yet, there is no doubt that, in other respects（同样，respect出现了第三遍。用influence、concerned、involved、relational等替换，是不是感觉更好呢？）, scandals do serve to distract us from these most pervasive social or political issues. A good case in point is Clinton sex scandal. Only time will tell whether this scandal, which ever had bombarded the front-page of nearly every newspaper all over the world, could serve any useful purpose to our society（我猜你想表达的是：只有时间能证明，那些曾披露在世界各地最新报纸上的头条新闻，是不是能对我们的社会起到积极的作用。但是这句，应该是佐证上句克林顿的，感觉无力并且衔接不自然，不知道想证明克林顿的什么？？如果是我，会把这个漂亮的句子用到结尾去，然后加几句真正想说明克林顿性丑闻的原因～）. Though there were few people to deny this scandal did attract public eyeballs（再次出现上文出现过两次的词汇deny和eyeball，呼应了但是是可以拿其他词替换的吧？）, as well as call our attention to the misconduct of political leaders, what it left is merely a petty incidence about the personal life of president. What is more, it is a pity that we have not seen any real reform on federal law systems. On the other hand, the Clinton sex scandal did serve to distract public from the most pressing social or global issues（如果我是改issue的老师，看见issue出现了第四次了！会抓狂的～～…）, thus as the frequent wars, famine, natural disasters, poverty, campus safety, to name just a few. In short, scandals do distract us from these most urgent problems. In addition, scandals can rarely bring about any benefit to public. It is merely a facial approach for media, whose aim is to maximize their profit, to cater for interest of majority, attract people as well as increase the rate of the publication. Therefore, there is no need to question why the scandal news about these famous figures-- whether popular singers, athletes, or political leaders-always appears on the front page of newspapers. Perhaps the sole function of scandals is to satisfy common people's interest and curiosity to learn more about these well known ones(celebrity). Thus, more important issues, such as pollutions, deforestation and criminal rate are compelled to relegate to the second pages of newspapers. If the masses cannot be attracted by these most pervasive social problems on the second pages, how would they make useful suggestion to government, and even take actions to protect their legal rights?（结尾不要用反问句，自己问的自己要记得回答） In conclusion, I agree with the statement of the speaker that scandals do serve to flag some socio-political problems more effectively than any speaker or reformer. Yet, in other respects, they can distract us from the most pressing matters, which are related to everyone more tightly than these meaningless scandals. Thus, whether a scandal's benefits outweigh the deleterious effects has to be addressed on a case-by-case basis. 总结：
1、结构是不错的，每段的TS都很分明。50分钟写近600字很厉害了，但是文章的质量不如数量～
2、最需要注意的，文章中的一个词汇，一定不要反复出现超过两次以上。整篇文章中，一定不要出现超过两个的出现率超过两次的词汇。
（issue，eyeball，deny，respect）
科学数据说超过三次就会引起人的视觉疲劳，三次以上会让人觉得忘记你到底说过几次了，而是觉得有“无数次”。
个人认为：宁可用个简单朴实的词汇或短语替换我们的某个上镜率最高的词汇，也不要让改卷老师觉得“你就只会这一个词”～～ 否则，哪怕你其他部分表达的再好，他的印象都会大打折扣的吧
3、例子。本文采用的是克林顿，但是没有句子进行充足的发挥，让人感觉力度不够。两处出现克林顿，两处都匆匆收尾，出现在不同的位置是为了证明不同的结论，而不是每个人都对克林顿丑闻不同面都很清楚，更需要你多下笔墨了，对吧？
改by Shania 07.7.23
[ 本帖最后由 Shania.33 于 2007-7-23 12:31 编辑 ] | 
GO
发表于 2007-7-22 18:16:35
转发
