gwd-20-41

Q41:Magazine Publisher:  Our magazine does not have a liberal bias.  It is true that when a book review we had commissioned last year turned out to express distinctly conservative views, we did not publish it until we had also obtained a second review that took a strongly liberal position.  Clearly, however, our actions demonstrate not a bias in favor of liberal views but rather a commitment to a balanced presentation of diverse opinions.

Determining which of the following would be most useful in evaluating the cogency of the magazine publisher’s response?

1. Whether any other magazines in which the book was reviewed carried more than one review of the book
2. Whether the magazine publishes unsolicited book reviews as well as those that it has commissioned

3. Whether in the event that a first review commissioned by the magazine takes a clearly liberal position the magazine would make any efforts to obtain further reviews

4. Whether the book that was the subject of the two reviews was itself written from a clearly conservative or a clearly liberal point of view
5. Whether most of the readers of the magazine regularly read the book reviews that the magazine publishes

the answer is C,谁帮我分解一下？

我们的杂志没有自由主义的倾向。我们去年发表的对一本书的评论最终表达了保守的观点，我们是在得到了另外一种开放的立场后才出版了评论。然而，我们的行为显示的不是一种支持开放评论的倾向，而是一种展示不同观点的义务。
问：哪一个对评估出版商的话的说服力最有用？

B 杂志是否与那些授权提供的书评一样出版主动提供的书评（无关,文中没有unsolicited book reviews ）

C 杂志发表的第一篇书评站在自由的立场上，它是否努力去得到其他的观点？

意识到自己的解释不是很有力，在这里再作一次更新。-- 于2009年男人节

要将杂志社所说的那个事例（同时出版两个对立的评论）和他们自称的维持客观公正联系起来，最关键的一点就是如何证明杂志社是主动有意识的这么规划而不是被动或者无意识的做了他们讲的事情。最关键的是证明那一个事例里杂志社等到自由评论出现后才出版是出于公正的考虑，而不是因为他们自己
就偏向于自由评论。 而证明他们自己是否偏向于自由评论的办法很简单，就是假设他们第一个是收到自由评论的话，他们是不是也能等到第二个保守评论后才出版？如果他们偏向自由评论，那通常情况下就应该会直接就出版而不死等待其他他们其实反对的观点出现。

A) 是否有其他的杂志在评论这本书时有超过一种评论  --- 无关

B) 杂志社是否除了出版被委托发表的书评外还出版自己编著的书评 --- 无关，是否出版与是否公正无关联

C) 如果第一篇被委托的书评是站在自由的立场的话，杂志社有没有做任何的努力去获取更多书评。请结合上面的解释来理解

D) 被提供两种书评的那本书本身是否有清晰的立场（保守或者自由） --- 无关，书本身的立场不代表杂志社的立场

E) 杂志读者是否会经常阅读书评 --- 无关

 

很显然，只有C)在确认杂志社是否有主动的行为来保持书评的多样性。