issue185 G-89-互助社-28日 （还有三天考试了，已做初步修改，请各位高手拍砖）

fantasianosUID: 207837

Issue185  第51篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：fantasia     共用时间：45分1秒     676 words
从2005年8月28日10时0分到2005年8月28日10时45分
------题目------
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.
------正文------
As the trend of society and culture flows and ebbs with its specific periodicity and yet progresses at its accelerating and eternal pace, more and more diverse items are jumping into human eyes, ranging from development of science to all sorts of scandals. Though a part of population assert that scandals are useful because they focus people's attention on problems in their distinctive ways, a closer examination to these items may suggest that the statement be either an oversimplification of scandals or an exaggeration of their benefits.

Admittedly, scandals--whether in politics, academia, or other areas--focus our attention to things that otherwise may not be noticeable. For example, before the Watergate about President Nixon was broadcasted and then widespread, citizens would not even suppose the president as a demagogue fighting for his own throne at the cost of honesty; instead common people would still believe in him for his charisma and superior ability in politics, economy and diplomacy. Hardly could the aftermath be predicted when other even more consequential events concerning with his political power took place if there were no such scandal. Another example involves the once overwhelming business--Enron. As is well-known, Enron died from its much too high ambition without discreet discerning to the reality. Such kind of things occur everyday, from the children wanting to run yet without the skill to walk first, to the bragging individuals get drunk before the dozens of beer they swore to drink were finished; but none of the daily incidents could pose such an immense impact to human minds. Thanks to these scandals, persons are now more aware of their behaviors.

What should be argued here, nevertheless, is that scandals are only helpful insofar as they bring sensible impacts; under circumstances other than these, it would be neither reasonable nor meaningful for the public to pay attention to them. A most significant instance is about the sexual scandals of stars--movie stars, television play stars, or athletic stars. Apart from the entertainment such affairs providing for us, what other substantial usage do they have? Seldom can people suggest any, except for the correspondents becoming well-known for the news and the stars then enjoying the attention paid. To tell the truth, it is wasting not only the energy of audience but also exploiting their time. Some people may declare that this is a kind of entertainment which supply happiness for the ordinary people, and should not be blamed for the entertaining function. Unfortunately, the entertainment does neither help result in a healthy fun nor inculcate in the young the appropriate social responsibility. To make the situation worse, there are even persons then lingering outside the stars' houses, waiting for their appearance and taking photographs, leaving other decent occupations and achievements out of their mind. Besides, a large scale of stars are vexed by these "scandals"--whether they are genuine or fake—for they had hurt their right to privacy. In the case that social individuals showed no respect for privacy, the community would be filled with intervention, and therefore resentment. Similarly, President Bill Clinton suffered his pornographic affair with Lewinsky, which almost forced him down from his seat. Fortunately, he had not been hurt much by the scandal and continued to fulfill his task as a significant/outstanding president in American history, or the USA would lose one of its prodigies. To approach the explanation without ambiguity and controversy, one important commend should be added first and foremost: a public leader's character can and must be divided into two portions--the "public self" and the "private self", as it was discussed in certain materials on Internet (and I paraphrase), when they are under determination for their political competence. Back to Clinton's situation, one does not have to go too far before she or he discovers that Clinton’s sexual scandals were in the category of "private self", while the performance of Nixon in Watergate was of "public self". No doubt is why divergent results they had.

In the course of contemporary, the developed science and technology enable ordinary people to be aware of all kinds of scandals. Though scandals bring us to certain kinds of important events, in other cases, they may destroy the harmony of both society and humanity.

fantasianosUID: 207837

这是初步修改稿，请大家多提意见，快考试了，谢谢