|
4
牛人
47
|
|
47
|
| 等级：
e
论坛骑士(三级)
40
|
| 积分：
4
6760
42
分 |
| 注册：
9
2006-8-14
40
|
| 发表：
4
2094
2
（
4
1178
48
主题贴） |
| 登录：
4
3466
ed
|
|
|
|
32
纽约时报“中美这七年”弗里德曼原文，到底写了什么！
35
|
2a93
今天看微信群里某博士转发的文章，题目《G20后美国纽约时报竟这样评论中国，值得每一个中国人深思！》文中开篇写道：
“美国《纽约时报》著名专栏作家托马斯·弗里德曼写过一篇文章。题为“中美这七年”，刊登在当年9月10日的《纽约时报》上。他轰动了整个华人圈、震惊了美国白宫！”
我看了以后，就用Google（百度查不出来，你懂得！）查了一下这位专栏作家托马斯弗里德曼(Thomas L. Friedman)在美国《纽约时报》的文章。发现那是该专栏著者在《纽约时报》题为“A Biblical Seven Years”的文章。发表在2008年8月26日，是他在北京奥运期间的文章。
托马斯弗里德曼“A Biblical Seven Years”
看了前面的几段，大体还是可以的，基本上是按着原文翻译或大意是差不多的，虽然有些地方可以商榷。
但是到了“眨眼工夫，你已经抵达上海市区。我扪心自问：究竟是谁生活在第三世界国家?”以后，根本就不是原来的文章了。
这样的写法和安排，绝大部分读者都会认为是托马斯的同一篇文章，而实际是糅杂进了大部分自己的思路和观点，亦真亦假，与原文要表达的意思相去甚远。
这样做，会意思吗？
——哈哈，或许挺有意思的、很有时代特色（绝不是中国特色）。
尤其是中文微信版：“智利是相对发达的发展中国家，但2010年一场大地震，GDP就跌掉一大块”
托马斯弗里德曼的原文是2008年写的，2年后的地震整么到文章里了？哈哈~不过，领会精神、领会大意……感觉倒是很像复旦大学著名教授张维为的演讲内容，被添加到弗里德曼的文章里了。——后真相时代：情感与观点太多，事实和真相已经不重要了
我们注意到，对国外媒体报道和时事评，在编译和翻译过程中掐头去尾、添油加醋和断章取义的现象，目前在一些平面和网络媒体都很普遍。
比如本文，除前面几段句子意思相似外，不仅凭空添加内容，还完全曲解了原作者的意思。这写媒体作者为吸引眼球、点击量、或众所周知的政治目的，不惜篡改原文，剥夺了读者阅读优质文章的机会。是无耻的。。你可以自己表达观点，为什么要借用他人的名义写？
前FT中文网总编辑：全球进入“假新闻时代” 媒体人须更专业
现在我把这些文章转载在此，让读者们自己评判。
《纽约时报》的原文，国内网友需要翻墙阅读：
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.
后真相时代：情感与观点太多，事实和真相已经不重要了
前FT中文网总编辑：全球进入“假新闻时代” 媒体人须更专业
对不起，邓小平没说过“菲律宾离中国也很近”
日本侵略中国的背景？99％国人竟不知道!
互联网时代的社交媒体如何影响民主制度？社交媒体在扼杀民主？
2016美国大选投票日之前，维基解密接连爆出希拉里及其团队的负面新闻，这些信息像病毒一样扩散，网络上充斥“把她关起来”，称希拉里为“骗子”、“撒旦的奴仆”等口号。希拉里也曾形容特朗普的支持者是“一群无耻之徒”。霍华德教授认为，双方相互谴责、对骂这种消极、负面的竞选手段，是对民主选举的伤害
推特上充斥着大量网络机器人信息（bots）也早就不是什么新鲜事，这类信息依靠程序自动发推，在推特上大行其道。很多团队曾对这类机器人信息进行过研究，甚至指出推特上一半以上的推文并非来自真人，而来自机器。在过去的几个月时间里，霍华德教授一直在研究推特上的机器人信息和政治的关系，他认为这些信息已经成为非常强有力的“计算机宣传活动”（computational propaganda）的工具。在6、7年前的选举中，这些机器人信息只是为政客添加粉丝，让某位政客看起来更受欢迎，现在，它们的用途却是参与公共话题的讨论，和推特用户互动、影响推特用户的决定。
7f
|
48
| [本贴被
8
作者本人
2
于
12
2017/4/25 14:33:34
41
编辑过] |
130
|
