ISSUE 44， 求死拍死拍，给我压力吧！！！！

sinlon

44. Claim: It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero.

Reason: The reputation of anyone who is subjected to media scrutiny will eventually be diminished.

The speaker claims that the reputation of anyone will eventually be diminished by mass media scrutiny, so that no one can be regarded as a hero. However, I cannot agree with both the reason and claim. In my view, anyone who is picked out by mass media is a real hero. Moreover, a hero does not amount to a celebrity who owns high reputation and respect.

In the age of mass media coverage, it is hard for anyone to conceal his flaws. It is true that under the purpose of pursuit of profits, mass media would like to focus its attention on scandals of people, especially of famous people. As a result, their reputation often is undermined by these negative effects. For instance, the Watergate scandal forced Nixon to resign from the president position. And the Clinton’s sexual scandal destroyed his opportunity to offer intellectual leadership. In short, there are uncounted examples can support this trend.

Someone, however, are deserved the reputation as heroes, no matter how the mass media scrutinize them. As people say, astraightfootisnotafraidf" target="_blank">ofacrookedshoe. No matter how powerful mass media is, it cannot posit that a person who is upright and incorruptible is unfair and immoral. It is impossible for media to compel people to consider such real heroes as hypocrites. Admittedly, no one is perfect. Even if media found out some flaws or mistakes on them, it does not diminish their achievements and prestige.



The most important thing is that heroes are actually all around. Heroes are common people who might not be renowned. The speaker’s claim is based on the assumption that heroes are famous and concerned people. I am afraid most people, including me, would disagree with this assumption. From the personal point of view, I admire celebrities, such as Bill Gates, Jobs, and Adam Smith. The reason why I adore them is not because they are heroes, but because they are only successful persons. On the contrary, I prefer to consider my parents and my deal professor, a soldier, etc, as heroes. Although they are ordinary, no one can deny their quality as heroes. From the social point of view, the general public revere those who devote their lives to those careers or make a contribution to the society, no matter in which field. As long as you did the right and good things for the society, you are a hero.

Heroes are only ordinary people. As for alleged famous people, though attract more public and media attention, they are just successful persons. Yet it is not necessary for heroes to make a success. Therefore, in the age of media coverage, we do not lack heroes. They are actually all around us.




The speaker claims that the reputation of anyone will eventually be diminished by mass media scrutiny, so that no one can be regarded as a hero. However, I cannot agree with both the reason and claim. In my view, anyone who is picked out by mass media is a real hero. Moreover, a hero does not amount to a celebrity who owns high reputation and respect.

In the age of mass media coverage, it is hard for anyone to conceal his flaws. It is true that under the purpose of pursuit of profits, mass media would like to focus its attention on scandals of people, especially of famous people. As a result, their reputation often is undermined by these negative effects. For instance, the Watergate scandal forced Nixon to resign from the president position. And the Clinton’s sexual scandal destroyed his opportunity to offer intellectual leadership. In short, there are uncounted examples can support this trend.

Someone, however, are deserved the reputation as heroes, no matter how the mass media scrutinize them. As people say, astraightfootisnotafraidf" target="_blank">ofacrookedshoe. No matter how powerful mass media is, it cannot posit that a person who is upright and incorruptible is unfair and immoral. It is impossible for media to compel people to consider such real heroes as hypocrites. Admittedly, no one is perfect. Even if media found out some flaws or mistakes on them, it does not diminish their achievements and prestige.



The most important thing is that heroes are actually all around. Heroes are common people who might not be renowned. The speaker’s claim is based on the assumption that heroes are famous and concerned people. I am afraid most people, including me, would disagree with this assumption. From the personal point of view, I admire celebrities, such as Bill Gates, Jobs, and Adam Smith. The reason why I adore them is not because they are heroes, but because they are only successful persons. On the contrary, I prefer to consider my parents and my deal professor, a soldier, etc, as heroes. Although they are ordinary, no one can deny their quality as heroes. From the social point of view, the general public revere those who devote their lives to those careers or make a contribution to the society, no matter in which field. As long as you did the right and good things for the society, you are a hero.

Heroes are only ordinary people. As for alleged famous people, though attract more public and media attention, they are just successful persons. Yet it is not necessary for heroes to make a success. Therefore, in the age of media coverage, we do not lack heroes. They are actually all around us.

普渡哥

Amount to 是什么句式？第一段里的

普渡哥

同篇要说明的是你观念里的英雄跟题目里的定义不一样。你知道美国人观念里英雄的定义吗？

我觉得你要做的是否定逻辑，而不是否定定义。有点偏题了。

竹林中人

写的太多了，感觉很有必要重新组织下