读趣百科

I think the news media mainly plays two important roles in modern society – providing information and influencing public opinion – and I think its influence is generally positive.

Obviously, the news media provides people with vast amounts of information in various forms. We can access it by listening to the radio, reading newspapers and magazines, watching television and by surfing the Internet. The ability to access news media is important for individuals and organizations because we make many decisions based on the news provided to us. Some of these decisions are mundane. We check the weather forecast to see whether we should take an umbrella to work. Other news, such as that about the business world, could influence whether we invest our savings in certain companies listed on the stock exchange.

The news is often presented to us in certain ways, using specific words to try to control our feelings and thoughts. This can be the main negative influence of the news media. Very often, the news media portrays people in simplistic ways, giving us some facts, but not the whole story. In the USA, some news media tends to support the Republicans whilst others tend towards the Democrats and the portrayal of individuals can reflect this. This is somewhat inevitable, because the editors, journalists and owners of the news media have opinions and biases. So, I think that it would be better if people checked news stories from different sources instead of only using one source.

Despite the fact that the news media can report events incorrectly or with bias, I think that the general influence on society is good. More factual information gives us the chance to make better decisions, both in our personal lives and in our working lives.

In this essay, I shall explain why I think we that should value old age and youth, without suggesting that one is better than the other.

I feel that we should celebrate the fact that so many people make it to old age. In the past, thanks to war, disease and the dangers of childbirth, most people were not so fortunate. Particularly in Western societies, a large (and growing) proportion of the population is past the age of retirement and most of those people are enjoying life. Many have saved enough money to live well and travel around the world or to play golf or to do whatever it is that they enjoy. They value the time they have and want to make the most of it. Simultaneously, societies around the world value the elderly for the experience and knowledge that they have gained over the years.

At the same time, cultures and individuals around the world value youth. Some people value it so much that they are prepared to spend plenty of money on maintaining a youthful look, through the use of make-up and plastic surgery. Youth is often seen as a time to be dynamic and fun, developing new ideas and trying things differently. This can be very useful to an economy. Would China have been able to develop so quickly in recent decades without a large supply of young people ready to take their chances in Shenzhen or Shanghai?

These are the main reasons why I think that it is a mistake to value either old age or youth and not the other. Of course, most people will value one more than the other, possibly depending on their age. However, as a culture - as a society - we should value both.

The extent to which people are influenced by advertisements can be measured in terms of the high sales of popular consumer goods, many of them being unnecessary or completely useless. Mainly through the media, advertisements on products and services are able to penetrate the public mind with half truth and half lying. In many cases, consumers are becoming so greedy that they are not only buying things they really do not need but also spending the money they do not have.

Although advertising gives people a chance as consumers, actually most advertisements tend to cause them to desire for something worthless. Under such circumstances, it is easy to change people's need into greed. So much so, they are constantly encouraged to want things--want this and want that. This human behavior is haunted by the media from all fronts: on radio, on television, and online, not to mention printed circulations such as newspapers and magazines. Obviously, a great number of "impulsive" buyers are persuaded under the illusion that new products or services could make a difference in their lives. Despite all the benefits of the free market economy, the effects of unreliable advertising are particularly negative in that the power of advertising does not reflect the real needs of the society in which products and services are sold.

Worse still, many consumers are convinced to waste money they do not have. Surrounded by advertisements, people are too unwise to perform a balanced act between income and expenditure. Increasingly, what seems to be good for economy begins to backfire because advertising is misleading consumers deeply into commercial debts which they probably could not afford to pay in due time. Thus, instead of improving people's lives, advertising may be considered as a "necessary evil" in modern time. Furthermore, as manufacturing and service companies are competing to have a larger share of the market, it is next to impossible to expect the media to reduce the amount of dishonest advertising. Besides, when it comes to making money, companies and the media are in the same religion.

After all, greed being a human instinct, consumers have only themselves to blame for their foolishness toward advertisements. Since outlawing commercial advertising is out of the question, people should educate themselves to be more prudent in buying and spending behaviors. As for consumers, what better measures can be taken to protect themselves other than self-control?

As can be argued, government rules can easily become obstacles to scientific achievements. Usually, most of the world's headline-making scientific discoveries do not come through governmental establishments, admitting that fiscal funding is often essential to helping such success to happen in the private sector. It is false to suggest that the government should carry out and control scientific research because the issue is not only about money but also brains.

Just because public funds matter, it does not follow that the government should restrict that kind of freedom of thinking which is vital to imaginative minds. Apart from that, nothing is more naive than for the government to play the role of police and rule research activities. Yes, freedom--that is how scientific breakthroughs are born. It goes without saying that probably billions of government's money may be needed to carry out research projects in various scientific fields, but it must be considered that great scientists tend to ignore, or even go against the rules. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how many scientific discoveries could have been missed as a result of unnecessary regulations. To put it strongly, control is the death of scientific research.

Scientific research should not be forced in any event. It is because a research problem is less likely to be solved by any apparatus which money can buy than to be solved by the brains of a free head that money cannot always buy. Thus, it does not seem proper for official amateurs to "know" what on earth scientists are doing. Otherwise, it would not be called "research" in the real sense of the word. Trying to heavily monitor scientific brains is perhaps a dangerous attitude since the consequence is always too much foliage and too little fruit. That can explain in part why the government ought to shift most of the pledged fiscal spending from the public to the private sector.

All aspects taken into account, scientific research is two things: billions and brains. With little doubt, the success in a country's scientific discoveries relies on both sufficient funding from the government and on creative minds from private companies in which pure research is worth every penny it costs. All the government has to do is grant money and expect that somewhere, something incredible is going to be known. (Created by Jeenn Lee Hsieh)

When visiting foreign countries some people think that it is advantageous to learn their cultures and traditions. How do you think people can learn other cultures and traditions? Why do you think that some people are interested in learning those traditions and cultures while others are not? Give reasons for your opinion and include any relevant examples from your knowledge or experience

It is common to experience culture shock when visiting other countries with different traditions and customs, particularly for an extended period of time. Some visitors are interested in adapting to foreign cultures and effectively manage culture shock; some people are not. There are several reasons why we can better enjoy travelling with an open mind and develop an appreciation for cultural differences across the world .

As visitors in foreign lands, we are probably in for the feeling of disorientation, insecurity and anxiety in unfamiliar situations. altogether known as culture shock. This phenomenon is understandable because values, behaviors and social customs we routinely take for granted no longer serve us in different surroundings. Of course, it takes time to learn a 'do-as-Romans-do' attitude, but it is always advisable to keep an open mind. We ought not to give in to the temptation to isolate ourselves into the comfort of what is familiar. Perhaps, all we need is a little more patience to understand the new environment in its historical and social context. In all events, the right thing to do is to observe objectively, and not to judge automatically as if anything different is 'wrong' or 'negative'.

To better appreciate differences culture-wise, it is also important that we learn beforehand enough background information about a country we are ging to. In case we know close to nothing about that country, it means that we might have no interest in its culture, so why should we visit there in the first place? For visitors, a little bit of knowledge about a foreign culture tends to be misleading. But it doesn`t have to be that way. For instance, making an effort to learn the local language and social customs can increase communication skills and proper behaviors, both being of great help to demonstrate an interest in a different culture as well as integrating with the local community. In fact, before travelling it pays to learn something of many things about a foreign country's culture and tradition, ranging from the greetings to the clothing to the before-meal ceremonies.

Visiting a foreign country can be a rewarding experience if we are open-minded and knowledge-conscious toward any different culture. It seems necessary to reduce the negative impact of culture shock so that the entire visit would become pure fun. After all, when we come across a new environment, we don't expect to experience everything exactly like back home, do we?