| 牛人 |
|
|
| 等級：論壇騎士(三級) |
| 積分：6890分 |
| 注冊：2006-8-14 |
| 發(fā)表：2142（1195主題貼） |
| 登錄：3612 |
|
|
| 紐約時(shí)報(bào)“中美這七年”弗里德曼原文，到底寫了什么！ |
今天看微信群里某博士轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)的文章，題目《G20后美國紐約時(shí)報(bào)竟這樣評論中國，值得每一個(gè)中國人深思！》文中開篇寫道：
“美國《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》著名專欄作家托馬斯·弗里德曼寫過一篇文章。題為“中美這七年”，刊登在當(dāng)年9月10日的《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》上。他轟動(dòng)了整個(gè)華人圈、震驚了美國白宮！”
我看了以后，就用Google（百度查不出來，你懂得！）查了一下這位專欄作家托馬斯弗里德曼(Thomas L. Friedman)在美國《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》的文章。發(fā)現(xiàn)那是該專欄著者在《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》題為“A Biblical Seven Years”的文章。發(fā)表在2008年8月26日，是他在北京奧運(yùn)期間的文章。
托馬斯弗里德曼“A Biblical Seven Years”
看了前面的幾段，大體還是可以的，基本上是按著原文翻譯或大意是差不多的，雖然有些地方可以商榷。
但是到了“眨眼工夫，你已經(jīng)抵達(dá)上海市區(qū)。我捫心自問：究竟是誰生活在第三世界國家?”以后，根本就不是原來的文章了。
這樣的寫法和安排，絕大部分讀者都會(huì)認(rèn)為是托馬斯的同一篇文章，而實(shí)際是糅雜進(jìn)了大部分自己的思路和觀點(diǎn)，亦真亦假，與原文要表達(dá)的意思相去甚遠(yuǎn)。
這樣做，會(huì)意思嗎？
——哈哈，或許挺有意思的、很有時(shí)代特色（絕不是中國特色）。
尤其是中文微信版：“智利是相對發(fā)達(dá)的發(fā)展中國家，但2010年一場大地震，GDP就跌掉一大塊”
托馬斯弗里德曼的原文是2008年寫的，2年后的地震整么到文章里了？哈哈~不過，領(lǐng)會(huì)精神、領(lǐng)會(huì)大意……感覺倒是很像復(fù)旦大學(xué)著名教授張維為的演講內(nèi)容，被添加到弗里德曼的文章里了。——后真相時(shí)代：情感與觀點(diǎn)太多，事實(shí)和真相已經(jīng)不重要了
我們注意到，對國外媒體報(bào)道和時(shí)事評，在編譯和翻譯過程中掐頭去尾、添油加醋和斷章取義的現(xiàn)象，目前在一些平面和網(wǎng)絡(luò)媒體都很普遍。
比如本文，除前面幾段句子意思相似外，不僅憑空添加內(nèi)容，還完全曲解了原作者的意思。這寫媒體作者為吸引眼球、點(diǎn)擊量、或眾所周知的政治目的，不惜篡改原文，剝奪了讀者閱讀優(yōu)質(zhì)文章的機(jī)會(huì)。是無恥的。。你可以自己表達(dá)觀點(diǎn)，為什么要借用他人的名義寫？
前FT中文網(wǎng)總編輯：全球進(jìn)入“假新聞時(shí)代” 媒體人須更專業(yè)
現(xiàn)在我把這些文章轉(zhuǎn)載在此，讓讀者們自己評判。
《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》的原文，國內(nèi)網(wǎng)友需要翻墻閱讀：
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/opinion/27friedman.html
《A BiblicalSeven Years》
Thomas L.Friedman
After attending the spectacularclosing ceremony at the Beijing Olympics and feeling the vibrations fromhundreds of Chinese drummers pulsating in my own chest, I was tempted toconclude two things: “Holy mackerel, the energy coming out of this country isunrivaled.” And, two: “We are so cooked. Start teaching your kids Mandarin.”
However, I’ve learned over theyears not to over-interpret any two-week event. Olympics don’t change history.They are mere snapshots — a country posing in its Sunday bests for all theworld too see. But, as snapshots go, the one China presented through theOlympics was enormously powerful — and it’s one that Americans need to reflectupon this election season.
China did not build themagnificent $43 billion infrastructure for these games, or put on theunparalleled opening and closing ceremonies, simply by the dumb luck ofdiscovering oil. No, it was the culmination of seven years of nationalinvestment, planning, concentrated state power, national mobilization and hardwork.
Seven years ... Seven years ...Oh, that’s right. China was awarded these Olympic Games on July 13, 2001 — justtwo months before 9/11.
As I sat in my seat at the Bird’sNest, watching thousands of Chinese dancers, drummers, singers and acrobats onstilts perform their magic at the closing ceremony, I couldn’t help but reflecton how China and America have spent the last seven years: China has beenpreparing for the Olympics; we’ve been preparing for Al Qaeda. They’ve beenbuilding better stadiums, subways, airports, roads and parks. And we’ve beenbuilding better metal detectors, armored Humvees and pilotless drones.
The difference is starting toshow. Just compare arriving at La Guardia’s dumpy terminal in New York City anddriving through the crumbling infrastructure into Manhattan with arriving atShanghai’s sleek airport and taking the 220-mile-per-hour magnetic levitationtrain, which uses electromagnetic propulsion instead of steel wheels andtracks, to get to town in a blink.
Then ask yourself: Who is livingin the third world country?
Yes, if you drive an hour out ofBeijing, you meet the vast dirt-poor third world of China. But here’s what’snew: The rich parts of China, the modern parts of Beijing or Shanghai orDalian, are now more state of the art than rich America. The buildings arearchitecturally more interesting, the wireless networks more sophisticated, theroads and trains more efficient and nicer. And, I repeat, they did not get allthis by discovering oil. They got it by digging inside themselves.
I realize the differences: We wereattacked on 9/11; they were not. We have real enemies; theirs are small andmostly domestic. We had to respond to 9/11 at least by eliminating the Al Qaedabase in Afghanistan and investing in tighter homeland security. They couldavoid foreign entanglements. Trying to build democracy in Iraq, though, which Isupported, was a war of choice and is unlikely to ever produce anything equalto its huge price tag.
But the first rule of holes isthat when you’re in one, stop digging. When you see how much moderninfrastructure has been built in China since 2001, under the banner of theOlympics, and you see how much infrastructure has been postponed in Americasince 2001, under the banner of the war on terrorism, it’s clear that the nextseven years need to be devoted to nation-building in America.
We need to finish our business inIraq and Afghanistan as quickly as possible, which is why it is a travesty thatthe Iraqi Parliament has gone on vacation while 130,000 U.S. troops arestanding guard. We can no longer afford to postpone our nation-building whileIraqis squabble over whether to do theirs.
A lot of people are now advisingBarack Obama to get dirty with John McCain. Sure, fight fire with fire. That’snecessary, but it is not sufficient.
Obama got this far because manyvoters projected onto him that he could be the leader of an American renewal.They know we need nation-building at home now — not in Iraq, not inAfghanistan, not in Georgia, but in America. Obama cannot lose that theme.
He cannot let Republicans makethis election about who is tough enough to stand up to Russia or bin Laden. Ithas to be about who is strong enough, focused enough, creative enough andunifying enough to get Americans to rebuild America. The next president canhave all the foreign affairs experience in the world, but it will be useless,utterly useless, if we, as a country, are weak.
Obama is more right than he knowswhen he proclaims that this is “our” moment, this is “our” time. But it is ourtime to get back to work on the only home we have, our time for nation-buildingin America. I never want to tell my girls — and I’m sure Obama feels the sameabout his — that they have to go to China to see the future.
后真相時(shí)代：情感與觀點(diǎn)太多，事實(shí)和真相已經(jīng)不重要了
前FT中文網(wǎng)總編輯：全球進(jìn)入“假新聞時(shí)代” 媒體人須更專業(yè)
對不起，鄧小平?jīng)]說過“菲律賓離中國也很近”
日本侵略中國的背景？99％國人竟不知道!
互聯(lián)網(wǎng)時(shí)代的社交媒體如何影響民主制度？社交媒體在扼殺民主？
2016美國大選投票日之前，維基解密接連爆出希拉里及其團(tuán)隊(duì)的負(fù)面新聞，這些信息像病毒一樣擴(kuò)散，網(wǎng)絡(luò)上充斥“把她關(guān)起來”，稱希拉里為“騙子”、“撒旦的奴仆”等口號。希拉里也曾形容特朗普的支持者是“一群無恥之徒”。霍華德教授認(rèn)為，雙方相互譴責(zé)、對罵這種消極、負(fù)面的競選手段，是對民主選舉的傷害
推特上充斥著大量網(wǎng)絡(luò)機(jī)器人信息（bots）也早就不是什么新鮮事，這類信息依靠程序自動(dòng)發(fā)推，在推特上大行其道。很多團(tuán)隊(duì)曾對這類機(jī)器人信息進(jìn)行過研究，甚至指出推特上一半以上的推文并非來自真人，而來自機(jī)器。在過去的幾個(gè)月時(shí)間里，霍華德教授一直在研究推特上的機(jī)器人信息和政治的關(guān)系，他認(rèn)為這些信息已經(jīng)成為非常強(qiáng)有力的“計(jì)算機(jī)宣傳活動(dòng)”（computational propaganda）的工具。在6、7年前的選舉中，這些機(jī)器人信息只是為政客添加粉絲，讓某位政客看起來更受歡迎，現(xiàn)在，它們的用途卻是參與公共話題的討論，和推特用戶互動(dòng)、影響推特用戶的決定。
|
| [本貼被作者本人于2017/4/25 14:33:34編輯過] |
|
有新帖
沒新帖
總置頂
置頂
精華貼
熱貼
普通貼