Issue 15

"Unfortunately, the media tend to highlight what is sensational at the moment. Society would be better served if the media reported or focused more fully on events and trends that will ultimately have the most long-term significance."

The speaker asserts that rather than merely highlighting certain sensational events the media should provide complete coverage of more important events. While the speaker's assertion has merit from a normative standpoint, in the final analysis I find this assertion indefensible.个人认为这一段最后一句可以背掉放入自己建立的句子库内。

Upon first impression the speaker's claim seems quite compelling, for two reasons. First, without the benefit of a complete, unfiltered, and balanced account of current events, it is impossible to develop an informed and intelligent opinion about important social and political issues and, in turn, to contribute meaningfully to our democratic society, which relies on broad participation in an ongoing debate about such issues to steer a proper course. The end result of our being a largely uninformed people is that we relegate the most important decisions to a handful of legislators, jurists, and executives who may or may not know what is best for us. Second, by focusing on the "sensational"——by which I take the speaker to mean comparatively shocking, entertaining, and titillating events which easily catch one's attention-the media appeal to our emotions and baser instincts, rather than to our intellect and reason. Any observant person could list many examples aptly illustrating the trend in this direction——from trashy talk shows and local news broadcasts to The National Enquixer and People Magazine. This trend dearly serves to undermine a society's collective sensibilities and renders a society's members more vulnerable to demagoguery; thus we should all abhor and resist the trend.

作者运用了让步的手法，先是分析原作为何出此观点的原因，然后再驳斥，提出自己的“正确”观点。我们要特别留意第一句的架构，虽然过分复杂，但是好像ets就是喜欢这种变态句子。

However, for several reasons I find the media's current trend toward highlights and the sensational to be justifiable. First, the world is becoming an increasingly eventful place; thus with each passing year it becomes a more onerous task for the media to attempt full news coverage. Second, we are becoming an increasingly busy society. The average U.S. worker spends nearly 60 hours per week at work now; and in most families both spouses work. Compare this startlingly busy pace to the pace a generation ago, when one bread-winner worked just over 40 hours per week. We have far less time today for news, so highlights must suffice. Third, the media does in fact provide full coverage of important events; anyone can find such coverage beyond their newspaper's front page, on daily PBS news programs, and on the Internet. I would wholeheartedly agree with the speaker if the sensational highlights were all the media were willing or permitted to provide; this scenario would be tantamount to thought control on a mass scale and would serve to undermine our free society. However, I am aware of no evidence of any trend in this direction. To the contrary, in my observation the media are informing us more fully than ever before; we just need to seek out that information.

作者从现实需要和事实证明两方面来驳斥原文观点，这一手法不妨借鉴。必须补充的是，作者运用的“First, … second…”这样的分层次分析使得结构鲜明，表意清晰也是值得学习的。

On balance, then, the speaker's claim is not defensible. In the final analysis the media serves its proper function by merely providing what we in a free society demand. Thus any argument about how the media should or should not behave——regardless of its merits from a normative standpoint begs the question.

最后一段照例总结，还可以。

得分：从语言的复杂度和内容的深刻度，=5分!