【Native Speaker每日综合训练—43系列】【43-07】文史哲

枣糕兔

内容：枣糕兔 编辑：枣糕兔

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

My apologies for the delay on the Saturday post. Hope you enjoy this Sunday read.
NOTE: The article in the obstacle part comes from a thesis (source: Harvard Law Review), and it’s just the introduction part. You can use the source down below at the end of this post to read the whole article.

Part I: Speaker

Why thinking you're ugly is bad for you

[Rephrase 1, 12’07]


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

枣糕兔

Part II: Speed

Outstanding Drama Series: "Breaking Bad"

Emmys show 'Big Four' networks not dead yet

Ed Bark   |   August 26, 2014

[Time 2]
(CNN) -- Maybe it was just a case of delaying the inevitable during Monday's 66th Primetime Emmy Awards ceremony.

Having showered an array of major nominations on cable, Netflix and movie stars while seeming to further diminish the so-called "Big Four" broadcast networks, Emmy voters in a sense recanted on the big night.

Eleven of the 25 trophies -- an unusually high percentage these days -- went to traditional over-the-air networks, while Netflix and the marquee movie stars got shut out. As they've tended to do in the past, voters instead rinsed and repeated by rewarding previous winners.

The six main categories are instructive.

AMC's "Breaking Bad" defended last year's championship in the Best Drama Series as it knocked off HBO's much-heralded "True Detective," which won just one Emmy all night.

In the Best Comedy Series, ABC's "Modern Family" prevailed for the fifth year in a row, tying the record set by NBC's "Frasier." Netflix's drama-fueled "Orange is the New Black," which entered itself in this category, did go to jail but did not collect any Emmys.

Julianna Margulies added to the broadcast network glow by winning a second Lead Actress in a Drama Series Emmy, this time for her role in CBS' "The Good Wife."

For the first time at any of this year's major awards ceremonies, Matthew McConaughey came away empty-handed in the Lead Actor in a Drama Series for his showy role in HBO's "True Detective." Bryan Cranston out dueled him and won his fourth Emmy for "Breaking Bad."

It was Julia Louis-Dreyfus' night once more in winning Lead Actress in a Comedy Series. She won her third Emmy for HBO's "Veep," and now is the only actress to take home the lead prize in three comedy series -- including NBC's "Seinfeld" and CBS' "The New Adventures of Old Christine."

CBS and Jim Parsons combined again in the Lead Actor in a Comedy Series category. Parsons has now won four Emmys for "The Big Bang Theory," which is still television's runaway most popular comedy series on all "platforms."
[341 words]

[Time 3]
For those of you keeping score, half of these marquee Emmys went to the traditional broadcast networks and each winner was a repeater.

In what seem like prehistoric times, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox used to dominate "television's biggest night" before flaunting their Emmy wins as promotional springboards for the new fall season.

NBC famously inserted commercials within the 1981 primetime ceremony touting the mounting number of Emmy wins for its then ratings-starved first-year series, "Hill Street Blues." The classic cop drama ended up winning six of NBC's eight Emmys on that night. And in its second season, "Hill Street" vaulted from nearly dead last to a top 30 finish in the yearly primetime Nielsen ratings.

Cable networks, led by HBO, began flexing muscles in the 1990s, though. Series such as "The Sopranos" and "Sex and the City" became Emmy darlings while HBO's movies were perennial winners.

At last year's major Emmy ceremony, HBO led all networks with seven wins, as other cable networks and Netflix combined for another 12 statues. That left the broadcast networks with just six wins out of the 25 major Emmys awarded. Whether it carries over or not -- and chances are it won't -- Monday night's 11 broadcast network wins are an overall morale boost compared with recent outcomes.

Also left at Emmy's altar Monday night was movie star Billy Bob Thornton, an early favorite for his villainous lead role in FX's "Fargo." But the "Lead Actor in a Miniseries or Movie" Emmy went to Benedict Cumberbatch for his title role in PBS' "Sherlock: His Last Vow."

Emmy host Seth Meyers had measured the traditional broadcast networks for a coffin early in his opening monologue. "MTV still has an award for music videos even though they no longer show music videos," he joked. "That's like network TV holding an awards show and giving all the trophies to cable and Netflix. That would be crazy. Why would they do that?"
[325 words]

[Time 4]
Meyers could have been speaking for host network NBC, which was shut out Monday night along with Fox. But old-liner CBS ended up in a three-way tie for the most Emmys, at five, with cable's AMC and FX. HBO, accustomed to walking away as Emmy's top dog, won just three Emmys to tie it with broadcasters ABC and PBS.

The Netflix shutout, following nominations in five of the six marquee categories, may be a message that Emmy voters are not yet ready to swoon over the "world's leading television Internet provider," as it bills itself. Netflix still keeps its audience numbers secret for its streaming original series and also may have riled some voters by submitting "Orange is the New Black" as a comedy in what looked like a craven grab for Emmy gold.

Indeed, Meyers basked in sustained applause and cheers when he cracked, "We had comedies that made you laugh and comedies that made you cry because they were dramas submitted as comedies."

In this Emmy year at least, the broadcast network contingent has something to cheer about, too. It might well be a last stand, with an increasing number of cable networks making original and praiseworthy drama or comedy series. But for one shining night, broadcasters CBS, ABC and PBS can all say they matched or exceeded HBO. These days that's no small feat.
[227 words]

Source: CNN Opinion
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/26/opinion/bark-emmys-network-cable-netflix/index.html?hpt=op_bn7

Ron Klain, above in New York City in 2008, was named the Ebola czar by President Obama on Oct. 17, 2014

(Photo by Andrew H. Walker/Getty Images)

Czar Wars

——How did a term for Russian royalty work its way into American government?

Ben Zimmer

[Time 5]
On Friday, President Obama chose Ron Klain, a former chief of staff to Vice President Joe Biden, be the nation’s “Ebola czar.” But what does an American “czar” do? And why do we even call them czars? In a 2008 piece for Slate, Ben Zimmer explains the term’s history. The original article is printed below.

When Benjamin Franklin wanted to describe our national indifference to royal pomp and circumstance, he would compare Americans to a London porter whose heavy load once jostled Czar Peter the Great. When told he had just bumped into the czar, the porter responded: "Poh! We are all czars here!"

Franklin's porter could have been describing the incoming Obama administration. Already Tom Daschle has been tapped for "health czar" and Carol Browner for "climate czar." Adolfo Carrión is expected to be the "urban affairs czar." There's also been talk of a "technology czar" and a "copyright czar." Plans for a "car czar" recently fell apart on Capitol Hill, but Obama and the incoming Congress will try, try again in the new year.

This efflorescence of czars—those interagency point people charged with cutting through red tape to coordinate policy—has people wondering: Why do we use a term from imperial Russia to describe bureaucratic troubleshooters?

Czar first entered English back in the mid-16th century, soon after Baron Sigismund von Herberstein used the word in a Latin book published in 1549. The more correct romanization, tsar, became the standard spelling in the late 19th century, but by that time czar had caught on in popular usage, emerging as a handy label for anyone with tyrannical tendencies.

On the American scene, czar was first bestowed on one of Andrew Jackson's foes: Nicholas Biddle, president of the Bank of the United States. Jackson vehemently opposed the centralized power of the bank, which he called a "hydra of corruption," and his clash with Biddle exploded into the "Bank War" of 1832-36. One of Jackson's staunchest allies in this fight, Washington Globe Publisher Frank Blair, dubbed Biddle "Czar Nicholas"—a potent image at a time when Russia's Nicholas I was at the height of his repressive nationalist regime. (Jackson's opponents fought fire with fire, calling him King Andrew I.)

After the Civil War, journalist David Ross Locke (writing under the moniker "Petroleum V. Nasby") lampooned Andrew Johnson's mishandling of Reconstruction, anointing him "the Czar uv all the Amerikas." But it wasn't until 1890 that the "czar" label became an American political staple. Republican House Speaker Thomas Reed incensed Democrats by disallowing a favored stalling tactic of the minority party: not responding to a quorum call. When Reed pushed through a rule that allowed the speaker to count members as present for the quorum even if they didn't respond, Democratic congressmen erupted with cries of "Czar! Despot! Tyrant!"
[466 words]

[Time 6]
The "Czar Reed" image stuck; the speaker would be known as "czar" for the rest of his career, after which time an even more potent House speaker, Joe Cannon, would inherit the title. As Reed's biographer William A. Robinson observed, the nickname "had no pleasant connotations" at the time. "In 1890, it brought to the mind the Russian autocrat himself," along with images of "the Cossacks, Siberia, and the knout" (a whip used for flogging).

That would all change after the Russian Revolution deposed the last real-life czar in 1917; painful images of imperial repression quickly faded to the background and Communist leaders became the new dictatorial icons. Accordingly, kinder, gentler "czars" made their way into American public life. When Kenesaw Mountain Landis became the first commissioner of baseball in 1920, "czar of baseball" worked just fine for the headline writers. New York had its "boxing czar" (Athletic Commission Chairman William Muldoon) and its "beer czar" (Alcoholic Beverage Control Board Chairman Edward Mulrooney). And when Nicholas Longworth served as House speaker in the late '20s, he distinguished himself from his predecessors Reed and Cannon as the "genial czar."

The newly benign term evolved again during World War II, when Roosevelt expanded the government rapidly and appointed a host of brand-new federal overseers. The Washington Post reported in 1942 on the sudden rush of "executive orders creating new czars to control various aspects of our wartime economy," and a cartoon from that year shows "czar of prices" Leon Henderson, "czar of production" Donald Nelson, and "czar of ships" Emory S. Land all cramming onto one throne.

In the postwar era, the rise of the "czar" has accompanied the expanding role of the executive office in promoting policy initiatives; the term tends to be used when presidents create special new posts for the individuals charged with pushing those initiatives through. Nixon succumbed to czarmania, appointing the first "drug czar," Jerome Jaffe, in 1971 (long before William Bennett took the mantle in 1988). But it was the title of "energy czar" that got the most attention during those days of OPEC embargoes and gas rationing. Though John A. Love first held the title in 1973, his more powerful successor William E. Simon really got the "czar" ball rolling. Doonesbury cartoonist Garry Trudeau found the "czar" title fitting, depicting Simon imperiously asking for his "signet ring and hot wax." Simon, for his part, enjoyed the sendup and took pleasure in colleagues calling him "your czarship."
[411 words]

[The Rest]
When Nixon offered him the job, Simon would later recall, the president himself used the term energy czar and discomfitingly likened the role to that of Hitler's minister of armaments, Albert Speer. Subsequent presidents, however, have shied away from the C-word and its domineering, anti-democratic connotations. Most recently, President Bush has been careful not to call Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute his "war czar," even though he's universally labeled that in the press. It's sure a lot easier than saying his official title: assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Now we hear that the Obama team doesn't like czar either. No wonder: Even now, the word evokes either old-fashioned despotism or latter-day caricatures of tin-pot tyrants. But it's safe to say it's not going anywhere, as long as that compact word keeps doing its job, glibly condensing bureaucratic mouthfuls.
[145 words]

Source: Slate
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2008/12/czar_wars.html

枣糕兔

Part III: Obstacle

Introduction: Reflections on the First Amendment and the Information Economy

——The causes and effects of bias in First Amendment scholarship

Mark Tushnet

NOTE: The article appears as the introduction of a thesis from Harvard Law Review. You can use the source down below at the end of this post to read the whole article.

[Paraphrase 7]
Apparently it is nearly impossible to write about the First Amendment without mentioning Professor Harry Kalven’s observation, quoting Professor Alexander Meiklejohn, that New York Times Co. v. Sullivan was “an occasion for dancing in the streets.” That mention need not always lead to agreement with Kalven’s assessment. Professor Richard Epstein, for example, begins his article “Was New York Times v. Sullivan Wrong?” with a part headed “No More Dancing.” For Epstein, the dancing stopped in newspaper editorial offices. But, as the years have passed, the dancing has continued in other corporate suites and in the law reviews. The Articles in this Symposium provide an opportunity to speculate about some of the First Amendment issues we are confronting fifty years after Sullivan in the information economy. This Introduction examines those Articles through the lens of general constitutional law. It focuses on broad questions about the roles of courts and legislatures in our constitutional scheme as they affect doctrines ranging from federalism (including preemption and the treaty power) to the state action doctrine. It also brings to bear “realist” or political perspectives on how the Court’s doctrines might be shaped by the Justices’ policy preferences. Those perspectives suggest that the Roberts Court’s probusiness tilt in First Amendment doctrine might conflict with the desires of global Internet businesses.

My observations are divided into four Parts. Part I offers quite brief descriptions of the Articles in this Symposium, primarily to give some background for the remarks that follow in this Introduction. Part II suggests that the structure for producing First Amendment scholarship is skewed in favor of “liking” the First Amendment in a sense I elaborate. This skew tends to isolate First Amendment doctrine and scholarship from the concerns expressed in general constitutional law and theory. Part III shifts focus, briefly describing the development of a business-friendly First Amendment, as distinct from a press-friendly one, and then suggesting that a business-friendly First Amendment might turn out to be business unfriendly in a global information economy. Part IV presents some thoughts about an issue that threads through the Articles — the possibility that our understanding of the state action doctrine, as invoked in First Amendment cases, fits uneasily into the information economy’s operation. Part V follows with a brief conclusion.

I. INTRODUCING THE ARTICLES

This Introduction tries to extract some general themes from the Articles here and to present them in the light cast by general constitutional theory. To that end, I provide brief summaries, focusing in particular on matters that I take up later in this Introduction. Each Article contains much more than what I summarize and extract from it for my own purposes, of course, and this Introduction is no substitute for reading the Articles themselves.

Professor Marvin Ammori describes the working environment of lawyers for major Internet participants, relying on interviews with the firms’ general counsels. These lawyers, Ammori tells us, grapple with First Amendment issues daily. In shaping corporate strategies, the general counsels are not Holmes’s “bad men” concerned only with the circumstances under which they might face court-imposed liability. Instead, as Ammori puts it, they “write the rules governing” speech. And more, because their clients operate on a global scale, these lawyers are not solely concerned with the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, but also with the laws, customs, and practices of foreign nations.

Professor Jack Balkin provides a catalogue of the ways in which contemporary speech regulations — “new-school” regulations — differ from traditional “old-school” ones. Old-school regulations dealt with physical spaces, the classic streets and parks, whereas new-school regulations deal with the “streets” over which digital information passes. Old-school regulations involved prior restraints and licensing targeted at disfavored speakers; new-school ones deal with the intermediaries who deliver what disfavored speakers say. And relatedly, new-school regulation is characterized by a substantial amount of cooperation be- tween public and private actors and the co-optation of the latter in the service of the former’s regulatory goals.

Professor Susan Crawford describes the modern technology that commercial providers of Internet services use to disseminate information and entertainment. She focuses on a challenge by Verizon to proposed regulations that would prevent such providers from operating business models that favor some information and entertainment sources over others. The providers, she argues, are modern common carriers, and equal access rules no more violate their First Amendment rights than do ordinary common-carrier rules violate the property rights of railroads and other traditional common carriers.

Comparing the legal treatment of different advertising regulations, Professor Rebecca Tushnet observes that courts treat emotions inconsistently. Sometimes the fact that a regulation is more effective because it is predicated on the association between expression and emotion is a reason for upholding one regulation, and yet sometimes that very same fact is given as a reason for invalidating another. She concludes with a plea for more consistent treatment of emotions in the law of free expression.

Finally, Professor Sonja West offers a defense of the position, so far rejected by the Supreme Court, that the institutional press deserves greater protection from government regulation than others, including those she describes as “occasional public commentators.”10 Responding to critics of that position, West provides a cluster of criteria that could guide courts in identifying the entities entitled to special protection as “the press.”
[873 words]

Source: Harvard Law Review
http://harvardlawreview.org/2014/06/introduction-reflections-on-the-first-amendment-and-the-information-economy/

samantha12

Speaking
The orator started her speaking with two examples: one is about herself, the other is about a teenage girl who posted a video to let others to judge whether she looks beautiful or not. By doing this she introduced the topic in her speech--self-esteem.
Then she explained the reason for this situation. The most impressive reason is alone, then followed some other reasons.
The third she told us the bad effects on judging yourself only on appearance. Also, the orator added programs aiming at solve the problem above, however, even though there are programs definitely available, most of them not only don't work but also have bad effects on teenagers. Considering the failure on these programs, the orator gave her suggestions.
At last, she called others on doing something to change the state quo, for the sake of our generations.

Reading 2 2:04.54
Winning prize introduction of Emmy.

Reading 3 1:59.46
Some insists about the Emmy, added with winning prizes  

Reading 4 1:24.19
There's competition among these boardcast companies. Different from the others, HBO owns its own style, even though
it didn't acquired the most prizes in this ceremony.

Reading 5 3:13.85
President Obama nominated a man as the car czar. Then the explaination, which led people to understand clearly a word, about "czar" has been made.
In modern time, how the word czar has been used. the history about usage of czar and when to use it.

Reading 6 2:46.84
Introducing the "czar" history by use the examples-- concern much more about people who use it. The idea that some people really love this word has been imposed.

rest 1:07.10
Even though someone definitely loved this word, his president truly went to the other way. At last, the author explained his opinion.

obstacle 6:54.86
The counterparts on a single question have been cleared. Both sides' opinion have been stated.
Faced with the same question, the author showed his attitude and let us know the construction of his article in  order to better understanding the question.
In the introduction part, at first we have known a misunderstanding. Then the differences between "new school regulation" and "old school regulation" have been explained. Following above, two professors perspectives has been made. In the last part, the 2nd professor's further attitude has been made.

alice_cd

time2
Emmys show
time3
awards in the Emmys show
time4
Meyers gains the Emmy gold because of the comedy.
time5 122/min
the 'czar''s history:its origin,spreading and application in US
time6 124/min
obstacle
briefly introduce the First Amendment and its five parts of the structure;use a huge proportion to introduce the article:the working environment of lawyers for major Internet participants,the difference of speech regulations between new-school and old-school,the modern technology commercial providers use to disseminate information&entertainment,inconsistent treat emotions of courts.

嗯哼哼哼

Speaking:
Teenagers are alone and pay much attention on their appearance. It is not a good phenomenon and three methods exist to solve this problem: education, role model and work together. Teenager should know who they are instead of what they look like.

Time2  02:46:64 341
3 02:50:74 325
4 01:56:01 227
5 04:27:00 466
6 03:38:82 411
Rest 01:19:20 145
obstacle

The author indicates the structure of the author’s observation
Part one: different professor’s claims.

efilwen

Listening:
The self-consciousness of the appearence of oneself will affect his/her self-assurence and actions. People should not judge others by the external appearence of themselves and others, but should pay much attention to what peole are thinking and doing.

time 2-4: 5''37'''

time 5: 4''13'''
time 6: 2''32+1''18''
Czar, a word derived from past Russia, came to America hundreds years ago and has been used to discribe somebody who is trouble-shooter. Obama have even assigned energy czar, medical czar etc. to many people. But this word is still not a favorable one in modern America as it reminds the old days without democracy.

obstacle: 6''23'''

画画2013

Speaker
When people are young, they love to see their reflection of the mirror, but most they do not have such a habit when they grow up. You can observe that many teenagers put their vedios on the internet to let others to judge their appearance, leaving no privace in the end.
31% teenagers do not want to take in a debate, because they do not want to be payed attention about what they look.
Teeneagers are more easily be inluenced by others'comments. And more than half of women afraid to take in an interview, because they do not believe in their appearance. So, as you can see, women can get more chances if they can feel free about their appearance and be confindent.
If you want to be different, you have to do something:
1. you have to educate for body confindence. Tough there have many programs to teach children to become confindent, but most of them do not work at all.
2. be better role models. We need to start to judge people by what they do, not what they look.
3. work together. All the society needs to work together to change this culture, so that teenagers can grow in a healthy circumstance.
We should teach our children that appearance is just one part of them, and the whole women in the world will get benefit if they can feel free frm their appearance.
Time2 2'11
Six main categories:
1. "Breaking Bad" won just one Emmy all night.
2. "Modern Family" kept the Best Comedy Series, and "Orange is the New Black" did not win any Emmy at all.
3. Julianna Margulies from " The Good Wife" won Lead Actress in Drama Series Emmy.
4. Bryan Cranston won his fourth for "Breaking Bad"
5. Julia Louis-Dreyfus won Lead Actress in a Comedy Series.
6. Parsons won four Emmys for "The Big Bang Theory"
Time3 2'11
All these awards belonged to traditional broadcast networks and each winner was a repeater.
Time4 1'18
Voters did not prepare to vote to Netfix, but it still keeps its audience numbers secret for its original series and the Meyers still feel optimistic about Netfix.
Time5 3'17
efflorescence 开花，风化;渗斑
lampoon 讽刺，讽刺文章
quorum 法定人数
despot 暴君
Why Amrican people use "Czar" to describe their government? It was first used by Franklin, he used czar to tell civils the difference between Amrican regime and others.
Then, why it has become an political word in Amrica? On the American scene, czar was first bestowed on one of Andrew Jackson's foes.
Time6 2'50
connotations 内涵，含蓄，暗示，隐含意义
Czar become more gentle in Amrican when Communist took over of Russia and took over the last czar. People use czar to describe the bureaus of the government, but almost all the preisdent teams do not like this term at all.
Obstacle 5'47
Main idea: The backgroud of the First Amendment.

the lawyers who take in the first Amendment pay their attention not only on American stuff, but also on the international. The new regulation on contemporary speech has a "new-school", which has many differences between the "old-school" regulation.

TVXQashley

time 2  2:13
time 3  1:55
time 4  1:31
time 5  3:12
time 6  2:16


obstacle  5:54

14/10/19

古月小破烂

Time 2 2’00
Time 3 2’08
Time 4 1’07
  About Emmy Awards ceremony. And information about the people whoget each awards
Time 5 2’05
Time 6 1’48
  The word Czar, the meaning of it. The history about it. And how people use it.
Obstacle 4’57
  Introduce how to organize the article.
  The first part is about introduction of the first amendment. Opinion about five professors.