新世紀英語四課文翻譯

時間：2025-11-30 21:18:03 課文大全

新世紀英語四課文翻譯

　　英語應該怎么翻譯呢？很多同學在學習英語的時候，都很煩惱課文的翻譯。以下是小編整理的新世紀英語四課文翻譯，歡迎閱讀。

新世紀英語四課文翻譯

　　How do mainstream media become mainstream?

　　Part of the reason I write about media is that I'm interested in all kinds of knowledge and culture, and the easiest thing to study is the media. Every day we find the media. So you can do systematic research, and compare the differences between today and yesterday. There is a lot of evidence for the media to exaggerate what is being played out, what is not exaggerated, and how the media is building things.

　　My impression of the media has always been that it is not very different from the academic or, for example, the journals that make the case for intellectuals, although there are some additional restrictions. But they interact with each other, and that's why people move freely between these fields. You want to study the media as scientists study a complex molecule. You look at the internal organizational structure of the media and then make some assumptions about what media products might look like on that basis. Then you look at media products to see if the situation is consistent with your assumptions. In fact, the work of media analysis belongs to the last one -- to study carefully what media products are, and whether these products meet the assumptions of those who know the nature and structure of the media.

　　So what did you find? First of all, you found that different media are doing different things, such as entertainment or Hollywood, soap, etc., or even most of the domestic (most) of the newspaper, they are in the lead the masses.

　　Another part of the media, the elite media, media are sometimes referred to as setting issues, because resources are rich, they set a framework for other peers in this framework, such as the New York times and CBS. Their audiences are mostly privileged. People who read the New York times - the rich or sometimes called some of the political class - are actually engaged in the political system. They basically is the management of one kind or another, may be managers in the field of politics, business managers (e.g., the company's management, etc.), Dr Managers (e.g., a professor at the university), or those for people to see a problem with thinking and methods for planning arrangement.

　　Elite media sets the framework for other media to operate. If you were watching the ap news, it continuously published a lot of messages, around three o 'clock in the afternoon it will suspend release new message, come out a every day the same notice: "dear editor note: tomorrow, the New York times front page will be issued the following news." The aim is that if you are a city of Dayton, Ohio, the editor of a newspaper, but there was no news sources, can think of or don't bother to dig the news, the announcement to tell you what news. The news is on the fourth page of your home page, and you leave it to non-local news or entertainment news. Put them in those pages because the New York times tells you what to watch tomorrow. If you're Ohio

　　Editor of a newspaper in Dayton, state, you can say that you have to do that because you lack the resources. If you don't do it by the rules, you'll soon see the consequences if you don't like it. In fact, the recent events in the SAN jose mercury news are a case in point. If you're off track, there are plenty of things you can do to get you back on track. If you break the pattern, it won't last long. That framework works well, it just reflects the obvious power structure, understandable.

　　The real mass media is basically entertainment. Let them do something else, so long as they don't bother us (" we "means people who control everything). For example, let them be interested in the sport of professional sport, which fascinates people about professional sports, sex scandals, celebrities and their problems, and so on. Anything, as long as it doesn't involve serious content. Of course, serious matters should be addressed by "us".

　　What are the elite media that set the agenda? For example, the New York times and CBS. First, they are both large and highly profitable companies, and most of them are in contact with larger companies like general electric or Westinghouse, or are wholly owned by them. In the framework of the system of private ownership, their status is high. Companies are basically autocratic, hierarchical and top-down control systems. If you don't like what they are doing, please do it yourself. The mainstream media is only part of that system.

　　What is the environment of the media system? It's basically the same thing. Interacting with them are all other important centres of power - government, other companies or universities. Because the media is a theoretical system, they are closely related to universities. Suppose you are a reporter to write a report about southeast Asia or Africa, you should to find a famous university expert to tell you what to write, or to a certain foundation, such as the brookings institute or the American enterprise institute, they will tell you what to say. These peripheral institutions are very similar to the media.

　　Universities, for example, are not independent institutions. While there may be some independent people in college, the media is the same, and so are the companies. In this regard, the fascist countries also have independent people. But the university itself is a parasitic institution that rely on external support, the support, such as private wealth fund companies and the government (the government and corporate power linked so closely that you even it is difficult to distinguish between both), the university's basic survival in them. Who find themselves in the midst of college without adaptation, not willing to accept and agree with the structure of people (if you don't agree with it, to believe in it, you won't be able to work together with it), will gradually be cleared out, from kindergarten began. There are many ways to filter out those pesky, independent thinkers. People who have gone to college know that the education system is a very good system for encouraging conformity. If you don't follow the rules, you will make trouble. Thus, the people who eventually leave behind this filter are the ones that really, honestly (and not pretend to) identify with the beliefs and attitudes of the social power class. The top schools, such as harvard and Princeton, and those small, high schools, have social functions. If you go through a school like harvard, where most of the time it's taught how to behave like a member of the upper class, how to think correctly and so on.

　　Well, look at the structure of the whole system. What do you expect the news to be? The results were obvious. We take the New York times as an example, it's a company that sells products, and its products are its audience. They didn't make money when you bought their newspaper. They are also happy to put newspapers on the Internet for free reading. In fact, selling newspapers is a loss to them. But the audience is their real product. Their product is the privileged class, you know, like those newspaper writers who are at the top of society making decisions. You have to sell products to the market, which, of course, refers to advertisers (ie, other industries). They sell their audiences, whether it's television or newspapers or any other media. These companies sell their audiences to other companies. This is big business for elite media.

　　Well, what do you expect to happen? What can you predict about the nature of media products in such a social environment? What would be the null hypothesis based on no further assumptions? The obvious assumption is that media products - both tangible and intangible - tend to reflect the interests of buyers and sellers around the media, the interests of these institutions. It would have been a miracle.

　　【翻譯】

　　主流媒體何以成為主流？

　　我之所以寫關于媒體的文章，部分原因是我對所有知識文化都很感興趣，其中最容易研究的便是媒體。每天我們都可覓得媒體的蹤影。因此你可以做系統的調查，也可以對比媒體今天與昨天兩個版本的差別。媒體夸大渲染了什么，沒夸大什么，以及媒體構建事物的方式，都有許多證據可供查詢。

　　我對媒體的印象一直是覺得它與學術或者，比如說，與知識分子發表觀點的雜志并沒有什么很大區別，盡管雜志有一些額外限制。但它們之間相互影響，這也是為什么人們在這些領域之間游走自如的原因。你想像科學家研究某種復雜的分子一樣去研究媒體。你觀察媒體的內部組織結構，然后在此基礎上對傳媒產品會是什么樣子這一問題做出某種假設。然后你考察傳媒產品，看看情況是否與你的假設相符。實際上媒體分析的工作都屬于最后這種——仔細研究什么是傳媒產品，以及這些產品是否符合那些對于媒體本質和結構的人盡皆知的假設。

　　那么，你發現了什么呢？首先，你發現有不同的媒體在做不同的事情，比如娛樂界或好萊塢、肥皂劇等等，或者甚至國內大多數（絕大多數）的報紙，它們在引導大眾。

　　媒體中的另外一部分，即精英媒體，有時候被稱為設定議題的媒體，因為資源豐富，它們設定框架讓其他同行在此框架下運作，諸如《紐約時報》、哥倫比亞廣播公司等。它們的受眾大多是特權階層。常讀《紐約時報》的人——富人或有時被稱為政治階層中的部分人——他們實際不間斷地參與到政治體系之中。他們基本上是這樣或那樣的管理人員，可能是政治領域的管理者、商界的管理者（如公司的管理層等等）、博士的管理者（如大學教授），或是那些對人們思考和看問題方法進行規劃安排的記者。

　　精英媒體為其他媒體設定運作的框架。如果你在觀看美聯社的新聞，它源源不斷發布大量的消息，下午三點左右它會暫停發布新消息，出來一條每天都一樣的通告：“各位編輯請注意：明天《紐約時報》頭版將發布以下新聞。”此舉目的是，如果你是俄亥俄州戴頓市某家報紙的編輯，卻沒有新聞來源，想不出或是根本就懶得去發掘新聞，這一通告告訴你有哪些新聞。這些新聞是給你刊登在首頁四分之一版面上的，你把它留給非本地新聞或娛樂新聞。把它們放在那些版面是因為《紐約時報》告訴你明天應該關注些什么新聞。如果你是俄亥俄

　　州戴頓市某家報紙的編輯，可以說你就得那樣做，因為你缺乏資源。如果你不按規矩來做，刊登大報不喜歡的消息，很快你就會看到后果。事實上，《圣荷西信使報》剛剛發生的事件就是一個極好的例子。如果你偏離軌道，高壓攻勢有的是辦法讓你回到正軌上來。如果你要打破既有模式，則維持不了多久。那種框架運行得很好，它只是反映了顯而易見的權力結構，可以理解。

　　真正的大眾傳媒基本上都是在娛樂大眾。讓它們去干些別的，只要不打擾我們（“我們”是指操控一切的人）。比如，讓他們對職業體育運動感興趣吧，讓大家著迷于職業體育、性丑聞、明星們和他們的問題，諸如此類。任何東西都行，只要不涉及嚴肅的內容。當然嚴肅的事情是大人物該關注的，由“我們”來處理吧。

　　設定議題的精英媒體有哪些呢？比如說《紐約時報》和哥倫比亞廣播公司。首先，它們都是大型的高盈利公司，此外，它們大多或與像通用電氣、西屋電氣這樣更大的公司有聯系，或完全屬于這些公司。在私有制經濟這一專制體制的權利構架中，它們的地位高高在上。企業基本上都是專制體制，等級森嚴，實行自上而下的控制體系。如果你不喜歡它們的所作所為，你請自便。主流媒體只是那個系統的一部分。

　　媒體制度的環境如何？可以說情形基本上都差不多。與它們互動的或相關的都是其他重要的權力中心——政府、其他公司或者大學。因為媒體是一個理論體系，它們與大學聯系緊密。假設你是名記者，要寫一篇關于東南亞或非洲的報道，你就應該到知名大學找個專家來告訴你寫些什么，或者是去某個基金會，比如布魯金絲研究所或美國企業研究院，他們會告訴你該說些什么。這些外圍機構與媒體非常類似。

　　例如大學就不是獨立的機構。雖然大學中可能零零散散有一些獨立的人，但是媒體也是一樣，企業也差不多。僅就此而言，法西斯國家亦如此，也會有獨立的人。但大學本身是寄生性的機構，它依賴來自外部的支持，這些支持諸如私人財富，提供資助的大公司以及政府（政府與企業權力相互聯系如此之密切，你甚至很難區分兩者），大學基本就生存于它們中間。那些置身于大學之中卻沒有適應、不愿意接受并認同這個結構的人們（假如你不認同它、相信它，你就無法與之共同發揮作用），就會逐步被清除出去，從幼兒園開始一直如此。有許多篩選手段剔除那些令人討厭的、獨立思考的人。念過大學的人就知道教育體制是一個非常適合鼓勵循規蹈矩的體制。如果你不循規蹈矩，便是惹是生非之人。因此，這種濾網最終留下的人只有那些真正地、誠實地（并非假裝地）認同了社會權力階層的信念和態度構成的框架。那些頂尖的院校，比如哈佛和普林斯頓，以及那些小型的上流院校，都具有使人社會化的功能。假如你經歷了哈佛這樣的學校，那里大多數時候都是在教規矩：如何像上流社會的成員一樣為人處世，如何正確地思考問題等等。

　　好了，你看看整個體制的結構。你期望新聞是什么樣的呢？結果顯而易見。我們以《紐約時報》為例，它是一家銷售產品的公司，它的產品就是它的受眾。你買他們報紙時他們并沒有掙錢。他們也樂于將報紙放到互聯網上供讀者免費閱讀。事實上，賣報紙對他們來說是賠本的。但受眾才是他們真正的產品。他們的產品就是特權階級，你知道，就像那些報紙撰稿人一樣身處社會頂端做決策的人。你必須向市場賣產品，市場當然是指廣告商（即其他行業）。不管是電視還是報紙或者任何其他媒體，它們都在賣自己的受眾。這些公司將自己的受眾賣給其他公司。對于精英媒體而言，這才是大生意。

　　好，你期待會發生什么？在這樣的社會環境下，你能對媒體產品的性質有些什么預測呢？在沒有進一步的假定基礎上，會有什么樣的無效假設呢？顯而易見的假設是：媒體的產品——不管是有形的還是無形的，其傾向都反映了圍繞在媒體周圍的買家和賣家的利益，即這些機構的利益。若非如此便是奇跡了。

【新世紀英語四課文翻譯】相關文章：

觀潮課文翻譯06-30