issue老外文章125篇(编辑修改稿)

issue老外文章125篇(编辑修改稿)内容摘要：

tes the parative significance of video as a documentary tool. For the purpose of documenting temporal, spatial events and experiences, I agree that a video record is usually more accurate and more convincing than a written record. It is impossible for anyone, no matter how keen an observer and skilled a journalist, to recount ha plete and objective detail such events as the winning touchdown at the Super Bowl, a Ballanchine ballet, the Tournament of Roses Parade, or the scene at the intersection of Florence and Normandy streets during the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Yet these are important events in contemporary life the sort of events we might put ha a time capsule for the purpose of capturing our life and times at the turn of this millennium. The growing documentary role of video is not limited to seminal events like those described above. Video surveillance cameras are objective witnesses with perfect memories. Thus they can play a vital evidentiary role in legal proceedingssuch as those involving robbery, drug trafficking, police misconduct, motor vehicle violations, and even malpractice in a hospital operating room. Indeed, whenever moving images are central to an event the video camera is superior to the written word. A written description f a hurricane, tornado, or volcanic eruption cannot convey its immediate power and awesome nature like a video record. A diary entry cannot replay that wedding reception, dance recital, or surprise birthday party as accurately or objectively as a video record. And a real estate brochure cannot inform about the lighting, spaciousness, or general ambiance of a featured property nearly as effectively as a video. Noheless, for certain other purposes, written records are advantageous to and more appropriate than video records. For example, certain legal matters are best left to written documentation: video is of no practical use ha documenting the terms of a plex contractual agreement, incorporation, or the establishment of a trust. And video is of little use when it es to documenting a person39。 s subjective state of mind, impressions, or reflections of an event or experience. Indeed, to the extent that personal interpretation adds dimension and richness to the record, written documentation is actually more important than video. Finally, a video record is of no use in documenting statistical or other quantitative information. Returning to the riot example mentioned earlier, imagine relying on a video to document the financial loss to store owners, the number of police and firefighters involved, and so forth. Complete and accurate video documentation of such information would require video cameras at every street corner and in every aisle of every store. In sum, the speaker39。 s claim overstates the importance of video records, at least to some extent. When it es to capturing, storing, and recalling temporal, spatial events, video records are inherently more objective, accurate, and plete. However, what we view through a camera lens provides only one dimension of our life and times。 written documentation will always be needed to quantify, demystify, and provide meaning to the world around us. Issue 8 It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. I agree with the speaker that it is sometimes necessary, and even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. A contrary view would reveal a naivety about the inherent nature of public politics, and about the sorts of promises on the part of wellintentioned political leaders necessary in order to further the public39。 s ultimate interests. Nevertheless, we must not allow our political leaders undue freedom to withhold information, otherwise, we risk sanctioning demagoguery and undermining the philosophical underpinnings of any democratic society. One reason for my fundamental agreement with the speaker is that in order to gain the opportunity for effective public leadership, a wouldbe leader must first gain and maintain political power. In the game of politics, plete forthrightness is a sign of vulnerability and naivety, neither of which earns a politician respect among his or her opponents, and which those opponents will use to every advantage to defeat the politician. In my observation some measure of pandering to the electorate is necessary to gain and maintain political leadership. For example, were all politicians to fully disclose every personal foible, character flaw, and detail concerning personal life, few honest politicians would ever by elected. While this view might seem cynical, personal scandals have in fact proven the undoing of many a political career。 thus I think this view is realistic. Another reason why I essentially agree with the speaker is that fully disclosing to the public certain types of information would threaten public safety and perhaps even national security. For example, if the President were to disclose the government39。 s strategies for thwarting specific plans of an international terrorist or a drug trafficker, those strategies would surely fail, and the public39。 s health and safety would be promised as a result. Withholding information might also be necessary to avoid public panic. While such cases are rare, they do occur occasionally. For example, during the first few hours of the new millennium the . Pentagon39。 s missile defense system experienced a Y2Krelated malfunction. This fact was withheld from the public until later in the day, once the problem had been solved。 and legitimately so, since immediate disclosure would have served no useful purpose and might even have resulted in mass hysteria. Having recognized that withholding information from the public is often necessary to serve the interests of that public, legitimate political leadership nevertheless requires for。