首页
登录
职称英语
Our public debates often fly off into the wild blue yonder of fantasy. So it’
Our public debates often fly off into the wild blue yonder of fantasy. So it’
游客
2023-12-08
295
管理
问题
Our public debates often fly off into the wild blue yonder of fantasy. So it’s been with the Federal Communications Commission’s new media-ownership rules. We’re told that, unless the FCC’s decision is reversed, it will worsen the menacing concentration of media power and that this will--to exaggerate only slightly--imperil free speech, the diversity of opinion and perhaps democracy itself. All this is more than overwrought; it completely misrepresents reality.
In the past 30 years, media power has splintered dramatically; people have more choices than ever. Travel back to 1970. There were only three major TV networks (ABC, CBS, NBC); now, there’s a fourth (Fox). Then, there was virtually no cable TV; now, 68 percent of households have it. Then, FM radio was a backwater; now there are 5,892 FM stations, up from 2,196 in 1970. Then, there was only one national newspaper (The Wall Street Journal); now, there are two more (USA Today and The New York Times ).
The idea that "big media" has dangerously increased its control over our choices is absurd. Yet much of the public, including journalists and politicians, believe religiously in this myth. They confuse size with power. It’s true that some gigantic media companies are getting even bigger at the expense of other media companies. But it’s not true that their power is increasing at the public’s expense.
Popular hostility toward big media stems partly from the growing competition, which creates winners and losers and losers complain. Liberals don’t like the conservative talk shows, but younger viewers do. A June poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that viewers from the ages of 18 to 29 approved of "hosts with strong opinions" by a 58 percent to 32 percent margin. Social conservatives despise what one recently called "the raw sewage, ultra violence, graphic sex and raunchy language" of TV. But many viewers love it. Journalists detest the cost and profit pressures that result from stiff com petition with other news and entertainment outlets.
It’s the tyranny of the market: a triumph of popular tastes. Big media companies try to anticipate, shape and profit from these tastes. But media diversity frustrates any one company from imposing its views and values on an unwilling audience. People just click to another channel or cancel their subscription. The paradox is this: the explosion of choices means that almost everyone may be offended by something. A lot of this free-floating hostility has attached itself to the FCC ownership rules.
The backlash is easily exaggerated. In the Pew poll, 51 percent of respondents knew "nothing" of the rules; an additional 36 percent knew only "a little". The rules would permit any company to own television stations in areas with 45 percent of U. S. households, up from 35 percent now. The networks could buy more of their affiliate stations a step that, critics say, would jeopardize "local’ control and content.
At best, that’s questionable. Network programs already fill most of affiliates’ hours. To keep local audiences, any owner must satisfy local demands, especially for news and weather programming. But the symbolic backlash against the FCC and big media does pose one hidden danger. For some U.S. house holds, over-the-air broadcasting is the only TV available, and its long-term survival is hardly ensured. Both cable and the Internet are eroding its audience. In 2002 cable programming had more primetime viewers than broadcast programming for 1he first time (48 percent vs. 46 percent). Streaming video, now primitive, will improve; sooner or later certainly in the next 10 or 15 years--many Web sites will be TV channels. If over-the-air broadcasting declines or disappears, the big losers will be the poor.
Broadcast TV will survive and flourish only if the networks remain profitable enough to bid for and provide competitive entertainment, sports and news programming. The industry’s structure must give them a long-term stake in over-the-air broadcasting. Owning more TV stations is one possibility. If Congress prevents that, it may perversely hurt the very diversity and the people that it’s trying to protect. [br] According to the passage, the wide spread of cable and Internet will be detrimental to ______.
选项
A、the affluence.
B、the privileged.
C、the needy.
D、the elderly.
答案
C
解析
细节题。由题干中的cable and Internet定位至倒数第二段。第五句中的“For some U.S. households, over-the-air broadcasting is the only TV available”和第六句的“Both cable and the Internet are eroding its audience”表明over-the-air broadcasting受到威胁。末句指出;If over-the-air broadcasting declines or disappears,the big losers will be the poor,可见,穷人是有线和互联网的受害者,故[C]为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3256602.html
相关试题推荐
Ourpublicdebatesoftenflyoffintothewildblueyonderoffantasy.Soit’
[originaltext]A:So,you’reanarchitect?B:Yes.A:Doyouworkforapublico
[originaltext]A:So,you’reanarchitect?B:Yes.A:Doyouworkforapublico
[originaltext]A:So,you’reanarchitect?B:Yes.A:Doyouworkforapublico
Sinceindependence,theIrishRepublichasadheredto______.A、apolicyofprotec
HowtoConquerPublicSpeakingFearI.IntroductionA.Publicsp
HowtoConquerPublicSpeakingFearI.IntroductionA.Publicsp
HowtoConquerPublicSpeakingFearI.IntroductionA.Publicsp
HowtoConquerPublicSpeakingFearI.IntroductionA.Publicsp
HowtoConquerPublicSpeakingFearI.IntroductionA.Publicsp
随机试题
I’mWangHong,atourguideatDiscoveringChina.I’vebeenworkingasatour
属于产热营养素的是( )。A.硫胺素 B.胡萝卜素 C.无机盐 D.糖类
根据公司法的规定,下列关于名义股东和实际出资人的说法正确的是( )。A、名义股东
A.发散、行气、行血 B.收敛固涩 C.软坚散结、泻下 D.补益、和中、缓
网页都是按照一种描述文档的标记规则编写而成的,这套标记规则叫作()。A.HT
在大多数情况下,操作风险损失和收益的关系是()。A.损失与收益是一一对应关
依据《律师事务所从事证券法律业务管理办法》,以下说法错误的是()A:律师担任公司
A.用力肺活量 B.肺泡通气量 C.余气量 D.肺活量 E.功能余气量对
患者男性,65岁,因持续上腹痛、食欲缺乏、消瘦,疑诊为胃癌,坚持行隐血试验检查,
《环境管理体系要求及使用指南》中,环境目标及其实现的策划部分包括的内容有( )
最新回复
(
0
)