【Native Speaker每日综合训练—41系列】【41-20】文史哲

MAGGIEHE1993

内容：枣糕兔 编辑：MAGGIEHE1993

Stay tuned for our latest post! Follow us here ---> http://weibo.com/u/3476904471

又见面啦哈哈~~~楼主比较懒就不给大家剧透文章的精彩内容啦~~~大家enjoy~~~

Part I: Speaker

Why A Good Book Is A Secret Door


[Rephrase 1, 16’59]
视频链接：http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNzg2ODgzOTc2.html

Source: TED talk
http://www.ted.com/talks/mac_barnett_why_a_good_book_is_a_secret_door

MAGGIEHE1993

Part II: Speed

Seats remain empty at Aloha Stadium during a NCAA college football game between the Boise State Broncos and the Hawaii Warriors on Nov. 10, 2012, in Honolulu.
(Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images)
Empty Seats, Fewer Donors?
——College football isn’t attracting the audience it used to.
Jake New

This article originally appeared in Inside Higher Ed.

[Time 2]
Game day. For many college alumni, the phrase alone is enough to conjure autumnal memories of watching football while surrounded by cheering student sections, marching bands, and brisk fall air.

But an increasing number of students, researchers say, now see the experience a little differently. For them, attending a football game more likely means sitting outdoors for hours in chilly weather, with little or no access to cellphone reception and alcohol. Once the tailgate party has ended, why not just cheer on the home team from a bar down the street? There are probably some cheap game-day specials, and there may even be free Wi-Fi.

Student attendance at major college football games is declining across the country. By how much varies greatly at each institution, but a recent Wall Street Journal analysis of turnstile data at 50 public colleges with top football programs found that average student attendance is down more than 7 percent since 2009.

In 2013 the University of Georgia’s designated student section was nearly 40 percent empty. The University of California at Berkeley has sold about 1,000 fewer student season tickets this season than last year—a season that already saw a decline from the previous one. Since 2009, student attendance at the University of Florida has dropped 22 percent. Three-fourths of the University of Kansas’ student tickets went unused last season.

The students who do still attend games tend to arrive later and leave earlier, said Richard Southall, director of the College Sports Research Institute, which can be an embarrassing headache for athletics programs.

“Fundamentally, students are part of the show, and that’s something that folks don’t always recognize,” Southall said. “If you watch a college sports telecast, where do the cameras go for in-crowd shots? The cameras are in the student section. If that section is not there, it’s like having a movie without enough extras to walk in the background of the shots. I always joke to my students, ‘You understand you’re paying to be extras. You’re just there for the show, so everyone else can keep consuming it.’ ”
[347 words]

[Time 3]
As universities may sometimes build ticket prices into student fees or offer unsold tickets to alumni and other fans, overall sales have not dropped dramatically, Southall said. Football revenues at large programs still often hover between $50 million and $80 million a year, according to the U.S. Department of Education, and even top $100 million at institutions like the University of Texas. But that could begin to change over the next decade or two.

Today’s uninterested students, athletics directors worry, could easily become tomorrow’s uninterested alumni. “Current students are not that important [to ticket sales], per se,” said Dan Rascher, a sports management professor at the University of San Francisco. “But you’re trying to turn those current students into former students who are still fans decades later. You want students, when they become alumni, to have that attachment and come back for the games, and that’s what’s concerning athletic departments."

A possible link between athletics—particularly success in athletics—and alumni giving has been debated for decades. Older studies are split about the issue, but more recent research argues that there is a connection, especially between football and donations to athletic programs rather than a university’s general fund.

The culprits for the downward trend in student attendance are not difficult to identify, said Mark Nagel, a professor of sports and entertainment management at the University of South Carolina. Tickets are getting more expensive, nonconference games are less evenly matched, and—thanks to lucrative and far-reaching broadcast contracts—it’s never been easier to watch games from the comfort of just about anywhere else. Students can often watch their college’s team play not just on television, but also on their computers, smartphones, and tablets.

“Students just have so many other choices now,” Nagel said. “TVs are getting inexpensive. The quality is getting better and better. Students are thinking, ‘Do I really want to go? Is it too hot? Too cold? Would I rather go watch the game somewhere more comfortable? Is it going to be a boring game?’ ”

The more difficult question to answer, Southall said, is what can colleges and universities do to slow or halt the decline. “Students are showing that they’re consumers like anyone else,” he said. “As college sports have become more and more commercialized, they’re having to compete with that home experience like the NFL and everybody else.”
[393 words]

[Time 4]
Some institutions are hoping that part of the solution lies in replicating aspects of watching the games on television. Last year the Big Ten Conference announced that its colleges could now show an unlimited number of replays at any speed on stadium videoboards, mirroring the multiple, slow-motion replays commonly featured in game broadcasts.

Previously, stadiums were allowed to show just one replay at only 75 percent of the actual speed. “Our goal on game day is to blend the best parts of an in-stadium experience with the best parts of an at-home experience,” Jim Delany, the Big Ten’s commissioner, said at the time.

More commonly, universities are trying to attract student fans by adding more amenities to stadiums and transforming the game day experience into something that can’t be found at a bar or in someone’s living room.

“We’re seeing more and more incentives,” Nagel said. “And we’re also seeing a trend toward creating a larger entertainment experience. The game on the field is still the centerpiece, but there’s more fireworks, more giveaways, more promotions. That’s the wave of the present.”

More than half of Division I FBS institutions plan on spending more than $10 million on facility investments over the next year, according to a recent survey conducted by Ohio University’s Center for Sports Administration and stadium designer AECOM. The top three priorities for that spending—enhancing food and beverage options, premium seating, and connectivity—all focus on the experience of fans, rather than the players.

Earlier this year the University of Nebraska at Lincoln approved a $12.3 million project for installing a better sound system and wireless Internet in its stadium. The University of California at Berkeley is now offering freshman season tickets, usually available for a $99 fee, for free. And 21 college-owned stadiums now sell alcohol, according to a survey conducted by the Associated Press. That’s double the number from five years ago.

“Even though it’s important to look at the macro issue, everything about how to solve this is really local,” Nagel said. “Numbers could be down at some stadiums, but certain schools could be up. It really is a situation where every school have their own micro issues that need to be dealt with.

“But they share the same concern: If students don’t have that affinity for their team as young people, when they’re 35 years old with a lot of expendable income, are they going to make the decisions their parents have as fans?”
[414 words]

Source: Slate
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/inside_higher_ed/2014/09/college_football_isn_t_attracting_the_audience_it_used_to.html

A shoot for Ballerina Project in Union Square, New York
How a ballerina dances

[Time 5]
(CNN) -- Is ballet dying?

Isabella Boylston, the 27-year-old new principal dancer at the American Ballet Theatre, says it's not. Born in Idaho, she started dancing at 3 even though no one in her family knew anything about it. Her love for ballet has taken her touring around the world.

While ballet is still very much admired, this classical and rigorous art form is no longer enjoying the popularity it once had in its glory heydays. "For most of the 20th century, including the entire post-war period, ballet was central to our cultural life. Now more than ever before it needs to be connected to the culture and the direction we're heading," says Jennifer Homans, a dance critic who has written about the history of ballet.

Homans says the tremendous social changes that occurred after the 1990s affected ballet's cultural prominence. The important question now is: What is the place of ballet in a rapidly changing and high-tech society where people like to watch three-minute YouTube videos or check text messages constantly?

To help revitalize ballet in the 21st century, New York University is opening the Center for Ballet and the Arts on September 22. "The big issue is the future of ballet. It is being reinvented as we speak -- and that takes time, talent and resources," says Homans, who is the heading the center.

With this new ballet think tank, and with dancers like Boylston who is full of optimism, will ballet leap gracefully into the 22nd century? Time will tell. CNN spoke with Boylston about what it's like to live and breathe ballet today.

Why should we care about ballet?

Ballet is such a unique art form. You can say things through dance that you could never express in words, and ballet has the ability to touch people on a deep, abstract level. In some ways, ballet is more valuable now than ever. Everything today is so fast-paced and technologically overloaded -- people are constantly staring into computers or their phone screens for entertainment. But going to the theater to see a ballet is unique in that it's completely live and in the moment -- unfiltered and unedited. It's a real and tangible meditation.
[367 words]

[Time 6]
What sparked your passion for dance?

I was about 11 when I completely fell in love with ballet. I was going to this little ballet school situated above a tavern, and we had live piano music, which is really rare for ballet class at that age. My teacher would bring a bag full of silk scarves and at the end of each class we would each take one and dance around and improvise to the music. It felt so free and was the perfect outlet for my creativity. I also loved watching dance movies. I loved "Center Stage" and "The Turning Point."

Do you have a favorite character?

So far, it's been Giselle. It's about a girl who falls in love for the first time and she's on this incredible high, then she gets betrayed and everything comes crashing down. She goes completely mad in front of everyone onstage and dies. In the second act she comes back as a spirit and finds forgiveness within herself. When I performed it this past season, I felt like I became her. It was so emotional, and I could feel so much support from the other dancers onstage. Everyone was invested in the story. Another favorite role is Odette/Odile in "Swan Lake." The Tchaikovsky score is incredible, and I love the animalistic swan imagery. It's a fun challenge to play up the contrast between White Swan and the Black Swan.

What are the 3 most painful things you've ever had to do?

Most people don't realize how athletic ballet is -- you have to be so mentally strong to be a dancer.

One of the toughest things I had to do was Act 2 of "Swan Lake" when I was in the Corps de Ballet. You have to stand very still on one leg in a position called b plus for what seems like an eternity, after jumping and doing hard dancing. Your feet cramp and everything hurts. When I first performed it as a teenager, I think I had tears streaming down my face. But then you learn how to pace yourself and it becomes more enjoyable.

Another ballet is "Theme and Variations," by George Balanchine. It's definitely one of the hardest things I've done. You get unbelievably tired, to the point that it feels almost impossible to get through. I've seen people throw up in the wings from exhaustion after it.

It's the same with Black Swan Pas de Deux from "Swan Lake". But, I don't focus on the pain. We love what we do. And it's the best feeling when you get through something really physically hard and the curtain comes down and you've given it your all physically and emotionally.
[451 words]

[The Rest]
How many hours do your dance every day?

On average, I probably dance for 7 to 9 hours a day. We start every day with ballet "class," which is a series of exercises you do to maintain strength and warm up. That's followed by rehearsals and sometimes a performance at night.

What do you say to people who say ballet is boring?

They've probably never seen a great ballet with great dancers. For instance, if you watch a bad football game it can be boring, too. Ballet has something for everyone to admire. If you don't like the choreography, you can listen to the music, and if you hate that too, then at least there are beautiful people onstage. There are some young choreographers working today like Justin Peck, who make ballets that are the farthest thing from boring. We are making a dance film together that will come out later this year. Stay tuned!

Do your feet hurt all the time?

Actually, no. Your feet become accustomed to being on pointe and our pointe shoes are surprisingly supportive, taking the stress off your toes. Other parts of my body hurt though. Ironically, the harder I'm working the less pain I have, because your body gets into crazy shape.

Any indulgences?

I've been pretty lucky and can eat pretty much whatever I want, especially when we are in season. On a show day I always have a bacon egg and cheese sandwich for breakfast. I don't eat a lot of sweets. My favorite food is pasta, specifically bucatini all'amatriciana, which I discovered when I was performing in Rome. And I love having a glass of wine after a show.
[279 words]

Source: CNN Opinion
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/19/opinion/zhang-ballet-future/index.html?hpt=op_t1

MAGGIEHE1993

Part III: Obstacle

Old-School/New-School Speech Regulation
——Governments develop new techniques for controlling and surveilling speech
Jun 20, 2014   |   127 Harv. L. Rev. 2296

This article is a part of the thesis from Harvard Law Review. Check out the link at the end of this page to read the thesis in its entirety.

[Paraphrase 7]
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and New York Times Co. v. United States (Pentagon Papers) are two famous examples of a great flowering of First Amendment jurisprudence during the middle of the twentieth century. The philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn declared Sullivan to be “an occasion for dancing in the streets.” Sullivan recognized that “the central meaning of the First Amendment” was that the state could not punish criticism of public officials made without malice either directly through the criminal law or indirectly through civil damages for defamation. Pentagon Papers reaffirmed the central First Amendment principle against prior restraints; Justice Stewart’s concurring opinion added that the government could not suppress disclosure of sensitive information unless the disclosure would “surely result in direct, immediate, and irreparable damage to our Nation or its people.” Together these two decisions celebrated the crucial role of the press in a democratic society, and stood for the principle that the circulation of public discourse is crucial to democratic legitimacy. Half a century later, the impact of these two decisions has been weakened by significant changes in the practices and technologies of free expression, changes that concern a revolution in the infrastructure of free expression. That infrastructure, largely held in private hands, is the central battleground over free speech in the digital era.

Government practices have also changed in the past fifty years. To be sure, governments still regulate speech through fines, criminal penalties, and injunctions; they still engage in predigital practices of surveillance. But new techniques have supplemented traditional modes of control over speech and traditional modes of surveillance. Like speech itself, the regulation and surveillance of speech require an infrastructure. Increasingly, speech regulation and surveillance are technologically imposed and involve cooperation between governments and the private entities that control the infrastructure of free expression.

Thus, a significant feature of the early twenty-first century is that the infrastructure of free expression increasingly is merging with the infrastructure of speech regulation and the infrastructure of public and private surveillance. The technologies and associated institutions and practices that people rely on to communicate with each other are the same technologies and associated institutions and practices that governments employ for speech regulation and surveillance.

Consider a mid-twentieth-century newspaper like the petitioner in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. To reach its audience, the Times depended on an infrastructure of technologies and institutions: printing presses, labor unions, delivery trucks, newsstands, and advertisers. These features of the Times’s business may have been regulated by the government in various ways — in trucking regulations, labor law, and so on. But for the most part the government’s capacities for control and surveillance of speech were not built into the very technologies and practices that the Times used to communicate with its audience. The government did not have a long-distance switch that allowed it silently and inexpensively to control the Times’s printing presses or prevent certain articles from appearing in its pages. The government did not require that members of labor unions operating the Times’s printing presses wear hidden microphones and cameras so that the government could learn about any potentially subversive or infringing materials. That is why it was necessary for the government to seek an injunction in the Pentagon Papers case. Of course, the government did control the public streets. Arguably it could have created roadblocks throughout New York City to search for and stop the Times’s delivery trucks, but this would have been highly visible, logistically difficult, and costly in terms of legitimacy.

The digital era is different. Governments can target for control or surveillance many different aspects of the digital infrastructure that people use to communicate: telecommunications and broadband companies, web-hosting services, domain name registrars, search engines, social media platforms, payment systems, and advertisers. The very forces that have democratized and decentralized the production and transmission of information in the digital era have also led to new techniques and tools of speech regulation and surveillance that use the same infrastructure. These tools of regulation and surveillance often work automatically and in the background; they may harness the cooperation or coercion of private owners of infrastructure to achieve the government’s regulatory goals. Low salience and use of private parties can help governments preserve legitimacy even as their policies block, limit, or spy on expression. This is the big story about the freedoms of speech, press, and association in the digital age.

Traditional or “old-school” techniques of speech regulation have generally employed criminal penalties, civil damages, and injunctions to regulate individual speakers and publishers. The landmark decisions in Sullivan and Pentagon Papers responded to old-school speech regulation: in both cases, the state had used penalties and injunctions directed at speakers and publishers in order to control and discipline their speech.

These methods have hardly disappeared in the twenty-first century. But now they are joined by “new-school” techniques of speech regulation. The latter regulate speech through control over digital networks and auxiliary services like search engines, payment systems, and advertisers; instead of focusing directly on publishers and speakers, they are aimed at the owners of digital infrastructure.

These new-school techniques have three characteristic features that often operate together. None of these features is entirely new. Each has counterparts or precedents in the predigital world, but each has been reshaped to fit the demands of a new technological environment.

The first feature is collateral censorship, in which the state regulates party A in order to control speaker B. The digital age enables a vast number of people to communicate widely across the country and around the world. Because there are so many speakers, who are often anonymous, difficult to co-opt, or otherwise beyond the government’s effective control, the state aims at Internet intermediaries and other owners of digital infrastructure — threatening liability to induce them to block, limit, or censor speech by other parties.

Second, and relatedly, public/private cooperation and co-optation are hallmarks of new-school speech regulation. To the extent that the government does not own the infrastructure of free expression, it needs to coerce or co-opt private owners to assist in speech regulation and surveillance — to help the state identify speakers and sites that the government seeks to watch, regulate, or shut down. To this end, the government may offer a combination of carrots and sticks, including legal immunity for assisting the government’s efforts at surveillance and control. Owners of private infrastructure, hoping to reduce legal uncertainty and to ensure an uncomplicated business environment, often have incentives to be helpful even without direct government threats.

Third, governments have devised new forms of digital prior restraint. Many new-school techniques of speech regulation have effects similar to prior restraints, even though they may not involve traditional licensing schemes or judicial injunctions. In addition, prior restraints are especially important to the government’s expansive surveillance practices in the National Surveillance State. As I explain in Part III, prior restraints directed at owners of private infrastructure are now ubiquitous in the United States; gag orders have become fully normalized and bureaucratized elements of digital surveillance, as routine as they are invisible.
[1170 words]

Source: Harvard Law Review
http://harvardlawreview.org/2014/06/old-schoolnew-school-speech-regulation/

MAGGIEHE1993

赶快自沙。。。
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article1: College football club is seeing a trend of audience declining. Some students no longer enjoy watching football
          games at the stadium. Although the whole ticket income have not declined seriously, future income would be
          affected. Schools are trying to invest in the games in order to attract more students to attend the game.
Article2: It is an interview of a ballet dancer. She regards ballet the love of her life and the art of ballet will never
         die. Because morden people are used to entertain themselves with short You-tube videos and constant text messages,
         perhaps they would be interested to go to the theater and enjoy the art of ballet. The interviewer asked the
         dancer about her life of ballet.
Obstacle: The way government regulated speech and traditional modes of surveillance in old days.
          Digital era is different and the government has also introduced "new-school" techniques of speech regulation.
          The three features of the new technique. The first feature is collateral censorship. The second feature is
          public/private cooperation and co-optation are hallmarks. The third feature is new forms of digital prior
          restraint.

小蘑菇开始打怪

THX 兔&MAGGIE妹子~
-------

speaker:

the difference between lies and truth

children worth a dream or story

the telephone records are so cute!

time7:

government dominates the speech

old methods

3 features of new-school tech

41系列终于水过去了。。
TED好评！

伊蔓达

谢谢枣糕兔和Maggie分享~

Speaker
an inspiring Tedtalk!I love it~

[Time 2]00:01:13.11
Student attendance at major college football games is declining across the country.

[Time 3] 00:02:08.14
A possible link between  success in athletics and alumni giving has been debated for decades. more recent research argues that there is a connection.so the concer is that today’s uninterested students could easily become tomorrow’s uninterested alumni.
the reason maybe that students today have so many other choices to watch the play, on television, also on their computers, smartphones, and tablets.

[Time 4]00:02:25.76
universities are trying to attract student fans by adding more amenities to stadiums and transforming the game day experience into something that can’t be found at a bar or in someone’s living room. such as installing a better sound system and wireless Internet in its stadium,or offering freshman season tickets for free.But they still share the same concern: If students don’t have that affinity for their team as young people, when they’re 35 years old with a lot of expendable income, are they going to make the decisions their parents have as fans?”

[Time 5]00:01:26.89
Ballet is such a unique art form.but the important question now is: What is the place of ballet in a rapidly changing and high-tech society where people like to watch three-minute YouTube videos or check text messages constantly?

[Time 6]&[The Rest]00:05:22.54
Isabella Boylston shared her experience with ballet.

[Paraphrase 7]00:8:43.31

old age-traditional modes of control over speech and surveillance.
new age- digital modes,that is new-school techniques,which have three characteristic features,but none of these features is entirely new. Each has counterparts or precedents in the predigital world
1collateral censorship
2private cooperation and co-optation
3new forms of digital prior restraint

这篇开头提出了关于新闻自由和国家安全的两个著名判例，引出了主要讨论的Old-School/New-School Speech Regulation.First Amendment是美国言论自由的基石，在the practice,boston legal还有the good wife里都有大量关于First Amendment的法庭辩论。

SMS

MAGGIEHE1993 发表于 2014-9-20 20:06
Part II: Speed

t
1.53
2.09
2.15
1.53
2.26

家辉的毛小毛

[time2]
2:32.72
student less to attend the foot ball game, because in the live show, they can not cheers and have a drink. if they cheers on the street or in the bar, it's cheap and have wifi to cheer. Every university have decline the percent of student attend the game. if the student come, they are come late and leave early.
[time3]
2:37.71
most university fee include the game ticket fee. more and more student not interested in see show. And the game show is commercial. students have lot functions to choose how to see the game show.
[time4]
1:35.22
the university solve the problem, attacking student to come.
[time5]
2:21.42
ballet is a unique art and has long history. but people always see in video less to to theatre.
[time6]
1:45.31
how to practice the ballet and how's the ballet dancer's life.
[time7]
5:38.52

slave918

首页.............T2 2:27
Students wound rather drink bear and enjoy Wifi, but not want to watch the football games.
This decline in students participating was reported in different institutes.
One professor reminds students that they are also part of the show.
T3
The problem is that current students would be alumni someday and they are not interested in the football.
The relation between the donation and the success of the team is debated.
The major culprit of the decline is the more choices that students have.
T4 3:28
The school offer the replay of the game with higher speed.
Also, school improve the amenities to better the experience of audiences.
Large investments are used to better the experience.
School use many methods to market the tickets.
Still, the author shows concerns that the students now don't have the interest would not donate money in the future.
T5 2:43
? is optimism about the future of ballot.
once ballot is very popular.
The problem now is the advanced tech bring people a new entertainment way.
the author shows uncertainty about the success of ballot.
Why ballot important? it is unique.
T6 3:03
Child experience bring the B passion.
characters that B like.
the 3 tough things:
pain, exhaustion and dedication.
Obstacle: 13:58
The free speech rights was undermined by the free talking in digital era.
new tech is invented to control the free talking.
It is difficult to control in the past.
However, digital tech offer government a new way to surveillance.
New method focus on the owner of digital infrastructure.

小念念

time 2：1'58
time 3:2'09
time 4:2'10
time5:1'49
time6:2'25
the rest:1'28