issue8 随便乱拍

paburawUID: 2204657

TOPIC: ISSUE8 - "It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."
WORDS: 434          TIME: 上午 12:45:00          DATE: 2006-6-27
POSITION 保持中立的观点， 是否要公开应该是要看情况而定
1 承认在一些情况下，公开消息会引起社会混乱
2 我们判断的标准应该是其时候对人民有利
3 社会舆论在这边起到一个很好的作用，因此一些具体的政府工作和运行还是应该公开

Is it necessary that for political leaders to withhold information for the public? Here, the speaker suggests that often it is benefit for political leaders to do so. To me, although insofar withholding information in some cases actually make sense and final protect the welfare of society as a whole, in my mind, whether information should be withheld should depend on the situation and the intention of political leader.

Admittedly, in some cases, withholding information for certain political intention is of importance in maintaining the stability of our society, and publishing such kind of information can accomplish nothing except causing public panic. There is no question that it is the duty of political leader to judge the consequences was the information disclosed. The healthy conditions of the leader of any one country, for example, should be regarded as state secrets. For discovering the healthy conditions of a leader, although the public is concerned with their leader's health, would make effects which are impossible to foresee in advance. Take a concrete example, recently, the health of Sharon, who is the former president of Israel, is becoming a hot issue in the international community. Since the delicate relationships between Israel and Pakistan are still at stake, Sharon’s health condition can serve as the inspiration of social turbulence of the two countries. Despite Israel people, along with the some terrorists, are all focusing on Sharon' health for different intention, for the complexity inherent in this issue, it is hard to say what kind of consequence would be in such a delicate situation in Middle East, a situation which might influenced the price of the petrol price of global.

Having recognizing the importance of withholding information in maintaining the stability of the society, which standard should we use to judge the merit of withholding information? The welfare of the people in certain society is the only standards. When we judge the intention that political leader withhold the information, we should use this kind of standards. If his intention is for the benefits the welfare of the public, then we should not accuse him for doing so, sometimes, even should praise him for bearing the burden of misunderstanding himself before letting the public know information. On the other hand, if his intention is for his own benefits, even his private interests, absolutely, he would be stepped down by people as soon as his aim is disclosed, ending his political career forever. Such as some officials are intended to conceal disadvantageous aspects of his work, and only show the public advantageous merits he did. No one will argue seriously this kind political leader would benefit our society, let alone serve for people.

The polity should serve the development of our society and the welfare of people, the public opinion should take a supervising role of the political leader, which realizing by the mass media in some sense. If the public even do not know the information, how do they involve in the process of supervising? Any democratic community should afford its people to participate in polity. Television, newspaper, magazine, also internet, all of above can be used as supervising tool. Publishing and commenting events are the most common use of media. For example, during the epidemiology of SARS, at first the Chinese government withheld the information about the exact number of patients which was criticized by the international community and many papers reported this information which imposed the pressure to the government. Under the pressure, the government took immediate course of action to control the spread of SARS. Thus we should ensue that the correct orientation is maintained in our society, and make sure it is effective in serving its supervising role.

In sum, there is a question about the intension of political leader that why they withhold the information, and the only standards are that whether it is according to the welfare of the people, in addition the public opinion should supervise the polity.

janezkkUID: 2209513

TOPIC: ISSUE8 - "It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."
WORDS: 434          TIME: 上午 12:45:00          DATE: 2006-6-27
POSITION 保持中立的观点， 是否要公开应该是要看情况而定
1 承认在一些情况下，公开消息会引起社会混乱
2 我们判断的标准应该是其时候对人民有利
3 社会舆论在这边起到一个很好的作用，因此一些具体的政府工作和运行还是应该公开

Is it necessary that (that是多余的，直接适用句型it is+adj+for sb to do sth) for political leaders to withhold information for (from) the public? Here, the speaker suggests that often it is benefit (benefit不能用作形容词) for political leaders to do so. To me, although insofar withholding information in some cases （insofar 和in some cases有矛盾和重复的地方）actually make sense and final （finally）protect the welfare of society as a whole, in my mind, whether information should be withheld should depend on (不需要用两个should，过于累赘。直接说depends on) the situation and the intention of political leader.

Admittedly, in some cases, withholding information for certain political intention is of importance in maintaining the stability of our society, and publishing such kind of information can accomplish nothing except causing public panic. (这段写得非常棒，赞一个！)There is no question that it is the duty of political leader to judge the consequences was the information disclosed. （这是病句，没看懂）The healthy conditions of the leader of any country, for example, should be regarded as state secrets. For discovering the healthy conditions of a leader, although the public is concerned with their leader's health, would make effects which are impossible to foresee in advance.(这句用词不准确，结构也不合理。再斟酌一下吧) Take a concrete example, recently, the health of Sharon, the former president of Israel, is becoming a hot issue（hot spot是不是更好些） in the international community.（国际社会就用society好了，community一般不这么用） Since the delicate relationships between Israel and Pakistan are still at stake, Sharon’s health condition can serve as the inspiration of social turbulence of the two countries. (serve 和inspiration用得都不够恰当，inspiration通常是好的鼓励，而不是引发骚乱) Despite Israel people, along with some terrorists, are all focusing on Sharon' health for different intention, for the inherent complexity in this issue, it is hard to say what kind of consequence would be in such a delicate situation in Middle East, a situation which might influenced the price of the petrol price of global. （最后一句用得很巧妙，是对delicate situation的补充说明，但price of the petrol price of global是什么意思呢？）

Having recognizing the importance of withholding information in maintaining the stability of the society, which standard should we use to judge the merit of withholding information? The welfare of the people in certain society is the only standard. When we judge the intention why political leader withholds the information, we should use this kind of standard. If his intention is for the benefits the welfare of the public（这里是病句，for 后面跟名词，既然benefits已经是名词了，又有一个名词welfare显然是有语病了）, then we should not accuse him for（accuse 和 of搭配） doing so, sometimes, even should praise him for bearing the burden of misunderstanding himself before letting the public know the information. On the other hand, if his intention is for his own benefits, even his private interests, absolutely, he would be stepped down by people as soon as his aim is disclosed, ending his political career forever. Such as some officials are intended to conceal disadvantageous aspects of his（their） work, and only show the public advantageous merits he did（they have）. No one will argue seriously this kind of political leader would benefit our society, let alone serve for people.

The polity should serve the development of our society and the welfare of people, the public opinion（承担监督角色的是公众而不是公众意见） should take a supervising role of the political leader, which realizing（被动态，应该用realized） by the mass media in some sense. If the public even do not know the information, how do they involve in the process of supervising? Any democratic community should afford its people to participate in polity. Television, newspaper, magazine, also internet, all of above can be used as supervising tool. Publishing and commenting events are the most common use of media. For example, during the epidemiology （这是流行病学，是一门学科，这里只要用epidemic） of SARS, at first the Chinese government withheld the information about the exact number of patients which was criticized by the international community and many papers reported this information which imposed pressure to the government. Under the pressure, the government took immediate course of action(只用action就可以，course of action是什么意思不太懂，解释一下) to control the spread of SARS. Thus we should ensure that the correct orientation is maintained （正确的方向是怎么做,如果要用动词，肯定是动名词形式，不可能是被动态）in our society, and make sure it is effective in serving its supervising role.

In sum, there is a question about the intension （应该是intention吧）of political leader that why they withhold the information, and the only standard is that whether it is according to the welfare of the people, in addition the public opinion should supervise the polity.

逻辑不够清晰，词汇的使用上太狭窄了点，通篇有大量重复使用的单词。可以尝试多使用些同义或是近义的词。