Don′t touch the corals with your finger，as they are very( )and easy to destroy！

Agressive courage and determination，and( )spirit is inevitable for rapid social development.

The panel has not yet reached agreement on a crucial question，however，( )to recommend legislation that would make it a crime for private funding to be used for human cloning.

There is a real possibility that these animals could be frightened，( )a sudden loud noise.

When I was a little child，I was used to sleeping with the window( )at night in summer.

Today is Children’s Day，you are allowed to eat( )in my restaurant.

The company adopted new policies to( )its market competitiveness.

( )us the information，we would have been ambushed.

This photo shows a( )image of the driver who hit the passerby and ran.

In addition，far( )Japanese workers expressed dissatisfaction with their jobs than did their counterparts in the 10 other countries surveyed.

In the nineteenth century，Samuel Gridley Howe founded the Perkins School for the Blind，( )for children in Boston，Massachusetts.

What is the ranking of Canada in the world by land area？( )

There are three main parties represented in the House of Representatives of Australia，which one is the oldest party？( )

In which day is Halloween celebrated？( )

( )is the dividing line between the South and North of America.

Which kind of animal is not the executive of Australia？( )

According to its geographical location，which one can be used to represent Australia？( )

( )laid the foundations of English state.

The Anglo-Saxons established( )system，whereby the lord of the manor collected taxes and organized the local army.

Which of the following clusters of words is an example of alliteration？( )

Of the following，( ) is NOT characteristic of Mark Twain′s works.

( ) is the first African-American winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature.

Alexander Pope was an outstanding enlightener and the greatest English poet of school in ( ) the first half of the 18th century.

The phrase“boys and girls”is a(n)( )

The poem“I Sought tell my love， Love that never told can be” violates among the ( ) Cooperative Principle.

English consonants can be classified into stops， fricative， nasals ect.，in terms of ( )

Which one is not in the same category with other three items？( )

Which item does not fall under the same category as the rest？( )

The novel For Whom the Bell Tolls is written by ( )

Which of the followings is not the novel of Ernest Hemingway？( )

Death of a Salesman was written by ( )

The success of Uncle Tom ′s Cabin did a great contribution to the anti slavery movement and brought this author，( )， an immediate popularity.

Which play is not a comedy？( )

Which of the following works expresses the desire for an escape from society and a return to nature？( )

The Grapes of Wrath is a masterpiece of ( )

The sense relation between“John plays the piano”and“John plays a musical instrument” is ( )

The molecules of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere affect the heat balance of the Earth by acting as a one-way screen. Although these molecules allow radiation at visible wavelengths, where most of the energy of sunlight is concentrated, to pass through, they absorb some of the longer-wavelength, infrared emissions radiated from the Earth’s surface, radiation that would otherwise be transmitted back into space. For the Earth to maintain a constant average temperature, such emissions from the planet must balance incoming solar radiation. If there were no carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, heat would escape from the Earth much more easily. The surface temperature would be so much lower that the oceans might be a solid mass of ice.

　　Today, however, the potential problem is too much carbon dioxide. The burning of fossil fuels and the clearing of forests have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 15 percent in the last hundred years, and we continue to add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Could the increase in carbon dioxide cause a global rise in average temperature, and could such a rise have serious consequences for human society? Mathematical models that allow us to calculate the rise in temperature as a function of the increase indicate that the answer is probably yes.

　　Under present conditions a temperature of -18℃ can be observed at an altitude of 5 to 6 kilometers above the Earth. Below this altitude (called the radiating level), the temperature increases by about 6℃ per kilometer approaching the Earth’s surface, where the average temperature is about 15℃. An increase in the amount of carbon dioxide means that there are more molecules of carbon dioxide to absorb infrared radiation. As the capacity of the atmosphere to absorb infrared radiation increases, the radiating level and the temperature of the surface must rise. One mathematical model predicts that doubling the atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise the global mean surface t

The molecules of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere affect the heat balance of the Earth by acting as a one-way screen. Although these molecules allow radiation at visible wavelengths, where most of the energy of sunlight is concentrated, to pass through, they absorb some of the longer-wavelength, infrared emissions radiated from the Earth’s surface, radiation that would otherwise be transmitted back into space. For the Earth to maintain a constant average temperature, such emissions from the planet must balance incoming solar radiation. If there were no carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, heat would escape from the Earth much more easily. The surface temperature would be so much lower that the oceans might be a solid mass of ice.

　　Today, however, the potential problem is too much carbon dioxide. The burning of fossil fuels and the clearing of forests have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 15 percent in the last hundred years, and we continue to add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Could the increase in carbon dioxide cause a global rise in average temperature, and could such a rise have serious consequences for human society? Mathematical models that allow us to calculate the rise in temperature as a function of the increase indicate that the answer is probably yes.

　　Under present conditions a temperature of -18℃ can be observed at an altitude of 5 to 6 kilometers above the Earth. Below this altitude (called the radiating level), the temperature increases by about 6℃ per kilometer approaching the Earth’s surface, where the average temperature is about 15℃. An increase in the amount of carbon dioxide means that there are more molecules of carbon dioxide to absorb infrared radiation. As the capacity of the atmosphere to absorb infrared radiation increases, the radiating level and the temperature of the surface must rise. One mathematical model predicts that doubling the atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise the global mean surface t

The molecules of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere affect the heat balance of the Earth by acting as a one-way screen. Although these molecules allow radiation at visible wavelengths, where most of the energy of sunlight is concentrated, to pass through, they absorb some of the longer-wavelength, infrared emissions radiated from the Earth’s surface, radiation that would otherwise be transmitted back into space. For the Earth to maintain a constant average temperature, such emissions from the planet must balance incoming solar radiation. If there were no carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, heat would escape from the Earth much more easily. The surface temperature would be so much lower that the oceans might be a solid mass of ice.

　　Today, however, the potential problem is too much carbon dioxide. The burning of fossil fuels and the clearing of forests have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 15 percent in the last hundred years, and we continue to add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Could the increase in carbon dioxide cause a global rise in average temperature, and could such a rise have serious consequences for human society? Mathematical models that allow us to calculate the rise in temperature as a function of the increase indicate that the answer is probably yes.

　　Under present conditions a temperature of -18℃ can be observed at an altitude of 5 to 6 kilometers above the Earth. Below this altitude (called the radiating level), the temperature increases by about 6℃ per kilometer approaching the Earth’s surface, where the average temperature is about 15℃. An increase in the amount of carbon dioxide means that there are more molecules of carbon dioxide to absorb infrared radiation. As the capacity of the atmosphere to absorb infrared radiation increases, the radiating level and the temperature of the surface must rise. One mathematical model predicts that doubling the atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise the global mean surface t

The molecules of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere affect the heat balance of the Earth by acting as a one-way screen. Although these molecules allow radiation at visible wavelengths, where most of the energy of sunlight is concentrated, to pass through, they absorb some of the longer-wavelength, infrared emissions radiated from the Earth’s surface, radiation that would otherwise be transmitted back into space. For the Earth to maintain a constant average temperature, such emissions from the planet must balance incoming solar radiation. If there were no carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, heat would escape from the Earth much more easily. The surface temperature would be so much lower that the oceans might be a solid mass of ice.

　　Today, however, the potential problem is too much carbon dioxide. The burning of fossil fuels and the clearing of forests have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 15 percent in the last hundred years, and we continue to add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Could the increase in carbon dioxide cause a global rise in average temperature, and could such a rise have serious consequences for human society? Mathematical models that allow us to calculate the rise in temperature as a function of the increase indicate that the answer is probably yes.

　　Under present conditions a temperature of -18℃ can be observed at an altitude of 5 to 6 kilometers above the Earth. Below this altitude (called the radiating level), the temperature increases by about 6℃ per kilometer approaching the Earth’s surface, where the average temperature is about 15℃. An increase in the amount of carbon dioxide means that there are more molecules of carbon dioxide to absorb infrared radiation. As the capacity of the atmosphere to absorb infrared radiation increases, the radiating level and the temperature of the surface must rise. One mathematical model predicts that doubling the atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise the global mean surface t

The molecules of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere affect the heat balance of the Earth by acting as a one-way screen. Although these molecules allow radiation at visible wavelengths, where most of the energy of sunlight is concentrated, to pass through, they absorb some of the longer-wavelength, infrared emissions radiated from the Earth’s surface, radiation that would otherwise be transmitted back into space. For the Earth to maintain a constant average temperature, such emissions from the planet must balance incoming solar radiation. If there were no carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, heat would escape from the Earth much more easily. The surface temperature would be so much lower that the oceans might be a solid mass of ice.

　　Today, however, the potential problem is too much carbon dioxide. The burning of fossil fuels and the clearing of forests have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 15 percent in the last hundred years, and we continue to add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Could the increase in carbon dioxide cause a global rise in average temperature, and could such a rise have serious consequences for human society? Mathematical models that allow us to calculate the rise in temperature as a function of the increase indicate that the answer is probably yes.

　　Under present conditions a temperature of -18℃ can be observed at an altitude of 5 to 6 kilometers above the Earth. Below this altitude (called the radiating level), the temperature increases by about 6℃ per kilometer approaching the Earth’s surface, where the average temperature is about 15℃. An increase in the amount of carbon dioxide means that there are more molecules of carbon dioxide to absorb infrared radiation. As the capacity of the atmosphere to absorb infrared radiation increases, the radiating level and the temperature of the surface must rise. One mathematical model predicts that doubling the atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise the global mean surface t

For the executive producer of a network nightly news programme, the workday often begins at midnight as mine did during seven years with ABC’s evening newscast. The first order of business was a call to the assignment desk for a pre-bedtime?rundownof latest developments.

　　The assignment desk operates 24 hours a day, staffed by editors who move crews, correspondents and equipment to the scene of events. Assignment-desk editors ate logistics experts; they have to know plane schedules, satellite availability, and whom to get in touch with at local stations and overseas broadcasting systems. They are required to assess stories as they break on the wire services—sometimes even before they do - and to decide how much effort to make to cover those stories.

　　When the United States was going to appeal to arms against Iraq, the number of correspondents and crews was constantly evaluated. Based on reports from the field and also upon the skilled judgments of desk editors in New York City, the right number of personnel was kept on the alert. The rest were allowed to continue working throughout the world, in America and Iraq ready to move but not tied down by false alarms.

　　The studio staff of ABC’s “World News Tonight” assembles at 9 a.m. to prepare for the 6:30 “air” p.m. deadline. Overnight dispatches from outlying bureaus and press services are read. There are phone conversations with the broadcast’s staff producers in domestic bureaus and with the London bureau senior producer, who coordinates overseas coverage. A pattern emerges for the day’s news, a pattern outlined in the executive producer’s first lineup. The lineup tells the staff what stories are scheduled; what the priorities are for processing film of editing tape; what scripts need to be written; what commercials ate scheduled; how long stories should run and in what order. Without a lineup, there would be chaos.

　　Each story’s relative value in dollars and cents must be continually as

For the executive producer of a network nightly news programme, the workday often begins at midnight as mine did during seven years with ABC’s evening newscast. The first order of business was a call to the assignment desk for a pre-bedtime?rundownof latest developments.

　　The assignment desk operates 24 hours a day, staffed by editors who move crews, correspondents and equipment to the scene of events. Assignment-desk editors ate logistics experts; they have to know plane schedules, satellite availability, and whom to get in touch with at local stations and overseas broadcasting systems. They are required to assess stories as they break on the wire services—sometimes even before they do - and to decide how much effort to make to cover those stories.

　　When the United States was going to appeal to arms against Iraq, the number of correspondents and crews was constantly evaluated. Based on reports from the field and also upon the skilled judgments of desk editors in New York City, the right number of personnel was kept on the alert. The rest were allowed to continue working throughout the world, in America and Iraq ready to move but not tied down by false alarms.

　　The studio staff of ABC’s “World News Tonight” assembles at 9 a.m. to prepare for the 6:30 “air” p.m. deadline. Overnight dispatches from outlying bureaus and press services are read. There are phone conversations with the broadcast’s staff producers in domestic bureaus and with the London bureau senior producer, who coordinates overseas coverage. A pattern emerges for the day’s news, a pattern outlined in the executive producer’s first lineup. The lineup tells the staff what stories are scheduled; what the priorities are for processing film of editing tape; what scripts need to be written; what commercials ate scheduled; how long stories should run and in what order. Without a lineup, there would be chaos.

　　Each story’s relative value in dollars and cents must be continually as

For the executive producer of a network nightly news programme, the workday often begins at midnight as mine did during seven years with ABC’s evening newscast. The first order of business was a call to the assignment desk for a pre-bedtime?rundownof latest developments.

　　The assignment desk operates 24 hours a day, staffed by editors who move crews, correspondents and equipment to the scene of events. Assignment-desk editors ate logistics experts; they have to know plane schedules, satellite availability, and whom to get in touch with at local stations and overseas broadcasting systems. They are required to assess stories as they break on the wire services—sometimes even before they do - and to decide how much effort to make to cover those stories.

　　When the United States was going to appeal to arms against Iraq, the number of correspondents and crews was constantly evaluated. Based on reports from the field and also upon the skilled judgments of desk editors in New York City, the right number of personnel was kept on the alert. The rest were allowed to continue working throughout the world, in America and Iraq ready to move but not tied down by false alarms.

　　The studio staff of ABC’s “World News Tonight” assembles at 9 a.m. to prepare for the 6:30 “air” p.m. deadline. Overnight dispatches from outlying bureaus and press services are read. There are phone conversations with the broadcast’s staff producers in domestic bureaus and with the London bureau senior producer, who coordinates overseas coverage. A pattern emerges for the day’s news, a pattern outlined in the executive producer’s first lineup. The lineup tells the staff what stories are scheduled; what the priorities are for processing film of editing tape; what scripts need to be written; what commercials ate scheduled; how long stories should run and in what order. Without a lineup, there would be chaos.

　　Each story’s relative value in dollars and cents must be continually as

For the executive producer of a network nightly news programme, the workday often begins at midnight as mine did during seven years with ABC’s evening newscast. The first order of business was a call to the assignment desk for a pre-bedtime?rundownof latest developments.

　　The assignment desk operates 24 hours a day, staffed by editors who move crews, correspondents and equipment to the scene of events. Assignment-desk editors ate logistics experts; they have to know plane schedules, satellite availability, and whom to get in touch with at local stations and overseas broadcasting systems. They are required to assess stories as they break on the wire services—sometimes even before they do - and to decide how much effort to make to cover those stories.

　　When the United States was going to appeal to arms against Iraq, the number of correspondents and crews was constantly evaluated. Based on reports from the field and also upon the skilled judgments of desk editors in New York City, the right number of personnel was kept on the alert. The rest were allowed to continue working throughout the world, in America and Iraq ready to move but not tied down by false alarms.

　　The studio staff of ABC’s “World News Tonight” assembles at 9 a.m. to prepare for the 6:30 “air” p.m. deadline. Overnight dispatches from outlying bureaus and press services are read. There are phone conversations with the broadcast’s staff producers in domestic bureaus and with the London bureau senior producer, who coordinates overseas coverage. A pattern emerges for the day’s news, a pattern outlined in the executive producer’s first lineup. The lineup tells the staff what stories are scheduled; what the priorities are for processing film of editing tape; what scripts need to be written; what commercials ate scheduled; how long stories should run and in what order. Without a lineup, there would be chaos.

　　Each story’s relative value in dollars and cents must be continually as

For the executive producer of a network nightly news programme, the workday often begins at midnight as mine did during seven years with ABC’s evening newscast. The first order of business was a call to the assignment desk for a pre-bedtime?rundownof latest developments.

　　The assignment desk operates 24 hours a day, staffed by editors who move crews, correspondents and equipment to the scene of events. Assignment-desk editors ate logistics experts; they have to know plane schedules, satellite availability, and whom to get in touch with at local stations and overseas broadcasting systems. They are required to assess stories as they break on the wire services—sometimes even before they do - and to decide how much effort to make to cover those stories.

　　When the United States was going to appeal to arms against Iraq, the number of correspondents and crews was constantly evaluated. Based on reports from the field and also upon the skilled judgments of desk editors in New York City, the right number of personnel was kept on the alert. The rest were allowed to continue working throughout the world, in America and Iraq ready to move but not tied down by false alarms.

　　The studio staff of ABC’s “World News Tonight” assembles at 9 a.m. to prepare for the 6:30 “air” p.m. deadline. Overnight dispatches from outlying bureaus and press services are read. There are phone conversations with the broadcast’s staff producers in domestic bureaus and with the London bureau senior producer, who coordinates overseas coverage. A pattern emerges for the day’s news, a pattern outlined in the executive producer’s first lineup. The lineup tells the staff what stories are scheduled; what the priorities are for processing film of editing tape; what scripts need to be written; what commercials ate scheduled; how long stories should run and in what order. Without a lineup, there would be chaos.

　　Each story’s relative value in dollars and cents must be continually as

This is not a good time to be foreign. Anti-immigrant parties are gaining ground in Europe. Britain has been fretting this week over lapses in its border controls. In America Barack Obama has failed to deliver the immigration reform he promised, and Republican presidential candidates would rather electrify the border fence with Mexico than educate the children of illegal aliens. America educates foreign scientists in its universities and then expels them, a policy the mayor of New York calls “national suicide”.

　　This illiberal turn in attitudes to migration is no surprise. It is the result of cyclical economic gloom combined with a secular rise in pressure on rich countries’ borders. But governments now weighing up whether or not to try to slam the door should consider another factor: the growing economic importance of Diasporas, and the contribution they can make to a country’s economic growth.

　　Diaspora networks-of Huguenots, Scots, Jews and many others-have always been a potent economic force, but the cheapness and ease of modern travel has made them larger and more numerous than ever before. There are now 215m first-generation migrants around the world: that’s 3％of the world’s population. If they were a nation, it would be a little larger than Brazil. There are more Chinese people living outside China than there are French people in France. Some 22m Indians are scattered all over the globe. Small concentrations of ethnic and linguistic groups have always been found in surprising places-Lebanese in West Africa, Japanese in Brazil and Welsh in Patagonia, for instance-but they have been joined by newer ones, such as west Africans in southern China.

　　These networks of kinship and language make it easier to do business across borders. They speed the flow of information. Trust matters, especially in emerging markets where the rule of law is weak. So does a knowledge of the local culture. And modern communications make these networks an even mor

This is not a good time to be foreign. Anti-immigrant parties are gaining ground in Europe. Britain has been fretting this week over lapses in its border controls. In America Barack Obama has failed to deliver the immigration reform he promised, and Republican presidential candidates would rather electrify the border fence with Mexico than educate the children of illegal aliens. America educates foreign scientists in its universities and then expels them, a policy the mayor of New York calls “national suicide”.

　　This illiberal turn in attitudes to migration is no surprise. It is the result of cyclical economic gloom combined with a secular rise in pressure on rich countries’ borders. But governments now weighing up whether or not to try to slam the door should consider another factor: the growing economic importance of Diasporas, and the contribution they can make to a country’s economic growth.

　　Diaspora networks-of Huguenots, Scots, Jews and many others-have always been a potent economic force, but the cheapness and ease of modern travel has made them larger and more numerous than ever before. There are now 215m first-generation migrants around the world: that’s 3％of the world’s population. If they were a nation, it would be a little larger than Brazil. There are more Chinese people living outside China than there are French people in France. Some 22m Indians are scattered all over the globe. Small concentrations of ethnic and linguistic groups have always been found in surprising places-Lebanese in West Africa, Japanese in Brazil and Welsh in Patagonia, for instance-but they have been joined by newer ones, such as west Africans in southern China.

　　These networks of kinship and language make it easier to do business across borders. They speed the flow of information. Trust matters, especially in emerging markets where the rule of law is weak. So does a knowledge of the local culture. And modern communications make these networks an even mor

This is not a good time to be foreign. Anti-immigrant parties are gaining ground in Europe. Britain has been fretting this week over lapses in its border controls. In America Barack Obama has failed to deliver the immigration reform he promised, and Republican presidential candidates would rather electrify the border fence with Mexico than educate the children of illegal aliens. America educates foreign scientists in its universities and then expels them, a policy the mayor of New York calls “national suicide”.

　　This illiberal turn in attitudes to migration is no surprise. It is the result of cyclical economic gloom combined with a secular rise in pressure on rich countries’ borders. But governments now weighing up whether or not to try to slam the door should consider another factor: the growing economic importance of Diasporas, and the contribution they can make to a country’s economic growth.

　　Diaspora networks-of Huguenots, Scots, Jews and many others-have always been a potent economic force, but the cheapness and ease of modern travel has made them larger and more numerous than ever before. There are now 215m first-generation migrants around the world: that’s 3％of the world’s population. If they were a nation, it would be a little larger than Brazil. There are more Chinese people living outside China than there are French people in France. Some 22m Indians are scattered all over the globe. Small concentrations of ethnic and linguistic groups have always been found in surprising places-Lebanese in West Africa, Japanese in Brazil and Welsh in Patagonia, for instance-but they have been joined by newer ones, such as west Africans in southern China.

　　These networks of kinship and language make it easier to do business across borders. They speed the flow of information. Trust matters, especially in emerging markets where the rule of law is weak. So does a knowledge of the local culture. And modern communications make these networks an even mor

This is not a good time to be foreign. Anti-immigrant parties are gaining ground in Europe. Britain has been fretting this week over lapses in its border controls. In America Barack Obama has failed to deliver the immigration reform he promised, and Republican presidential candidates would rather electrify the border fence with Mexico than educate the children of illegal aliens. America educates foreign scientists in its universities and then expels them, a policy the mayor of New York calls “national suicide”.

　　This illiberal turn in attitudes to migration is no surprise. It is the result of cyclical economic gloom combined with a secular rise in pressure on rich countries’ borders. But governments now weighing up whether or not to try to slam the door should consider another factor: the growing economic importance of Diasporas, and the contribution they can make to a country’s economic growth.

　　Diaspora networks-of Huguenots, Scots, Jews and many others-have always been a potent economic force, but the cheapness and ease of modern travel has made them larger and more numerous than ever before. There are now 215m first-generation migrants around the world: that’s 3％of the world’s population. If they were a nation, it would be a little larger than Brazil. There are more Chinese people living outside China than there are French people in France. Some 22m Indians are scattered all over the globe. Small concentrations of ethnic and linguistic groups have always been found in surprising places-Lebanese in West Africa, Japanese in Brazil and Welsh in Patagonia, for instance-but they have been joined by newer ones, such as west Africans in southern China.

　　These networks of kinship and language make it easier to do business across borders. They speed the flow of information. Trust matters, especially in emerging markets where the rule of law is weak. So does a knowledge of the local culture. And modern communications make these networks an even mor

This is not a good time to be foreign. Anti-immigrant parties are gaining ground in Europe. Britain has been fretting this week over lapses in its border controls. In America Barack Obama has failed to deliver the immigration reform he promised, and Republican presidential candidates would rather electrify the border fence with Mexico than educate the children of illegal aliens. America educates foreign scientists in its universities and then expels them, a policy the mayor of New York calls “national suicide”.

　　This illiberal turn in attitudes to migration is no surprise. It is the result of cyclical economic gloom combined with a secular rise in pressure on rich countries’ borders. But governments now weighing up whether or not to try to slam the door should consider another factor: the growing economic importance of Diasporas, and the contribution they can make to a country’s economic growth.

　　Diaspora networks-of Huguenots, Scots, Jews and many others-have always been a potent economic force, but the cheapness and ease of modern travel has made them larger and more numerous than ever before. There are now 215m first-generation migrants around the world: that’s 3％of the world’s population. If they were a nation, it would be a little larger than Brazil. There are more Chinese people living outside China than there are French people in France. Some 22m Indians are scattered all over the globe. Small concentrations of ethnic and linguistic groups have always been found in surprising places-Lebanese in West Africa, Japanese in Brazil and Welsh in Patagonia, for instance-but they have been joined by newer ones, such as west Africans in southern China.

　　These networks of kinship and language make it easier to do business across borders. They speed the flow of information. Trust matters, especially in emerging markets where the rule of law is weak. So does a knowledge of the local culture. And modern communications make these networks an even mor

It can be argued that much consumer dissatisfaction with marketing strategies arises from an inability to aim advertising at only the likely buyers of a given product. There are three groups of consumers who are affected by the marketing process. First, there is the market segment—people who need the commodity in question. Second, there is the program target—people in the market segment with the “best fit” characteristics for a specific product. Lots of people may need trousers, but only a few qualify as likely buyers of very expensive designer trousers. Finally, there is the program audience—all people who are actually exposed to the marketing program without regard to whether they need or want the product

　　These three groups are rarely identical. An exception occurs in cases where customers for a particular industrial product may be few and easily identifiable. Such customers, all sharing a particular need, are likely to form a meaningful target, for example, all companies with a particular application of the product in question, such as high-speed fillers of bottles at breweries. In such circumstances, direct selling (marketing that reaches only the program target) is likely to be economically justified, and highly specialized trade media exist to expose members of the program target—and only members of the program target—to the marketing program.

　　Most consumer-goods markets are significantly different. Typically, there are many rather than few potential customers. Each represents a relatively small percentage of potential sales. Rarely do members of a particular market segment group themselves neatly into a meaningful program target. There are substantial differences among consumers with similar demographic characteristics. Even with all the past decade’s advances in information technology, direct selling of consumer goods is rare, and mass marketing—a marketing approach that aims at a wide audience—remains the only economically feasible mode.

It can be argued that much consumer dissatisfaction with marketing strategies arises from an inability to aim advertising at only the likely buyers of a given product. There are three groups of consumers who are affected by the marketing process. First, there is the market segment—people who need the commodity in question. Second, there is the program target—people in the market segment with the “best fit” characteristics for a specific product. Lots of people may need trousers, but only a few qualify as likely buyers of very expensive designer trousers. Finally, there is the program audience—all people who are actually exposed to the marketing program without regard to whether they need or want the product

　　These three groups are rarely identical. An exception occurs in cases where customers for a particular industrial product may be few and easily identifiable. Such customers, all sharing a particular need, are likely to form a meaningful target, for example, all companies with a particular application of the product in question, such as high-speed fillers of bottles at breweries. In such circumstances, direct selling (marketing that reaches only the program target) is likely to be economically justified, and highly specialized trade media exist to expose members of the program target—and only members of the program target—to the marketing program.

　　Most consumer-goods markets are significantly different. Typically, there are many rather than few potential customers. Each represents a relatively small percentage of potential sales. Rarely do members of a particular market segment group themselves neatly into a meaningful program target. There are substantial differences among consumers with similar demographic characteristics. Even with all the past decade’s advances in information technology, direct selling of consumer goods is rare, and mass marketing—a marketing approach that aims at a wide audience—remains the only economically feasible mode.

It can be argued that much consumer dissatisfaction with marketing strategies arises from an inability to aim advertising at only the likely buyers of a given product. There are three groups of consumers who are affected by the marketing process. First, there is the market segment—people who need the commodity in question. Second, there is the program target—people in the market segment with the “best fit” characteristics for a specific product. Lots of people may need trousers, but only a few qualify as likely buyers of very expensive designer trousers. Finally, there is the program audience—all people who are actually exposed to the marketing program without regard to whether they need or want the product

　　These three groups are rarely identical. An exception occurs in cases where customers for a particular industrial product may be few and easily identifiable. Such customers, all sharing a particular need, are likely to form a meaningful target, for example, all companies with a particular application of the product in question, such as high-speed fillers of bottles at breweries. In such circumstances, direct selling (marketing that reaches only the program target) is likely to be economically justified, and highly specialized trade media exist to expose members of the program target—and only members of the program target—to the marketing program.

　　Most consumer-goods markets are significantly different. Typically, there are many rather than few potential customers. Each represents a relatively small percentage of potential sales. Rarely do members of a particular market segment group themselves neatly into a meaningful program target. There are substantial differences among consumers with similar demographic characteristics. Even with all the past decade’s advances in information technology, direct selling of consumer goods is rare, and mass marketing—a marketing approach that aims at a wide audience—remains the only economically feasible mode.

It can be argued that much consumer dissatisfaction with marketing strategies arises from an inability to aim advertising at only the likely buyers of a given product. There are three groups of consumers who are affected by the marketing process. First, there is the market segment—people who need the commodity in question. Second, there is the program target—people in the market segment with the “best fit” characteristics for a specific product. Lots of people may need trousers, but only a few qualify as likely buyers of very expensive designer trousers. Finally, there is the program audience—all people who are actually exposed to the marketing program without regard to whether they need or want the product

　　These three groups are rarely identical. An exception occurs in cases where customers for a particular industrial product may be few and easily identifiable. Such customers, all sharing a particular need, are likely to form a meaningful target, for example, all companies with a particular application of the product in question, such as high-speed fillers of bottles at breweries. In such circumstances, direct selling (marketing that reaches only the program target) is likely to be economically justified, and highly specialized trade media exist to expose members of the program target—and only members of the program target—to the marketing program.

　　Most consumer-goods markets are significantly different. Typically, there are many rather than few potential customers. Each represents a relatively small percentage of potential sales. Rarely do members of a particular market segment group themselves neatly into a meaningful program target. There are substantial differences among consumers with similar demographic characteristics. Even with all the past decade’s advances in information technology, direct selling of consumer goods is rare, and mass marketing—a marketing approach that aims at a wide audience—remains the only economically feasible mode.

It can be argued that much consumer dissatisfaction with marketing strategies arises from an inability to aim advertising at only the likely buyers of a given product. There are three groups of consumers who are affected by the marketing process. First, there is the market segment—people who need the commodity in question. Second, there is the program target—people in the market segment with the “best fit” characteristics for a specific product. Lots of people may need trousers, but only a few qualify as likely buyers of very expensive designer trousers. Finally, there is the program audience—all people who are actually exposed to the marketing program without regard to whether they need or want the product

　　These three groups are rarely identical. An exception occurs in cases where customers for a particular industrial product may be few and easily identifiable. Such customers, all sharing a particular need, are likely to form a meaningful target, for example, all companies with a particular application of the product in question, such as high-speed fillers of bottles at breweries. In such circumstances, direct selling (marketing that reaches only the program target) is likely to be economically justified, and highly specialized trade media exist to expose members of the program target—and only members of the program target—to the marketing program.

　　Most consumer-goods markets are significantly different. Typically, there are many rather than few potential customers. Each represents a relatively small percentage of potential sales. Rarely do members of a particular market segment group themselves neatly into a meaningful program target. There are substantial differences among consumers with similar demographic characteristics. Even with all the past decade’s advances in information technology, direct selling of consumer goods is rare, and mass marketing—a marketing approach that aims at a wide audience—remains the only economically feasible mode.

Practically speaking, the artistic maturing of the cinema was the single-handed achievement of David W. Griffith (1875-1948). Before Griffith, photography in dramatic films consisted of little more than placing the actors before a stationary camera and showing them in full length as they would have appeared on stage. From the beginning of his career as a director, however, Griffith, because of his love of Victorian painting, employed composition. He conceived of the camera image as having a foreground and a rear ground, as well as the middle distance preferred by most directors. By 1910 he was using close-ups to reveal significant details of the scene or of the acting and extreme long shots to achieve a sense of spectacle and distance. His appreciation of the camera’s possibilities produced novel dramatic effects. By splitting an event into fragments and recording each from the most suitable camera position, he could significantly vary the emphasis from camera shot to camera shot.

　　Griffith also achieved dramatic effects by means of creative editing. By juxtaposing images and varying the speed and rhythm of their presentation, he could control the dramatic intensity of the events as the story progressed. Despite the reluctance of his producers, who feared that the public would not be able to follow a plot that was made up of such juxtaposed images, Griffith persisted, and experimented as well with other elements of cinematic syntax that have become standard ever since. These included the flashback, permitting broad psychological and emotional exploration as well as narrative that was not chronological, and the crosscut between two parallel actions to heighten suspense and excitement. In thus exploiting fully the possibilities of editing, Griffith transposed devices of the Victorian novel to film and gave film mastery of time as well as space.

　　Besides developing the cinema’s language, Griffith immensely broadened its range and treatment of subjects.

Practically speaking, the artistic maturing of the cinema was the single-handed achievement of David W. Griffith (1875-1948). Before Griffith, photography in dramatic films consisted of little more than placing the actors before a stationary camera and showing them in full length as they would have appeared on stage. From the beginning of his career as a director, however, Griffith, because of his love of Victorian painting, employed composition. He conceived of the camera image as having a foreground and a rear ground, as well as the middle distance preferred by most directors. By 1910 he was using close-ups to reveal significant details of the scene or of the acting and extreme long shots to achieve a sense of spectacle and distance. His appreciation of the camera’s possibilities produced novel dramatic effects. By splitting an event into fragments and recording each from the most suitable camera position, he could significantly vary the emphasis from camera shot to camera shot.

　　Griffith also achieved dramatic effects by means of creative editing. By juxtaposing images and varying the speed and rhythm of their presentation, he could control the dramatic intensity of the events as the story progressed. Despite the reluctance of his producers, who feared that the public would not be able to follow a plot that was made up of such juxtaposed images, Griffith persisted, and experimented as well with other elements of cinematic syntax that have become standard ever since. These included the flashback, permitting broad psychological and emotional exploration as well as narrative that was not chronological, and the crosscut between two parallel actions to heighten suspense and excitement. In thus exploiting fully the possibilities of editing, Griffith transposed devices of the Victorian novel to film and gave film mastery of time as well as space.

　　Besides developing the cinema’s language, Griffith immensely broadened its range and treatment of subjects.

Practically speaking, the artistic maturing of the cinema was the single-handed achievement of David W. Griffith (1875-1948). Before Griffith, photography in dramatic films consisted of little more than placing the actors before a stationary camera and showing them in full length as they would have appeared on stage. From the beginning of his career as a director, however, Griffith, because of his love of Victorian painting, employed composition. He conceived of the camera image as having a foreground and a rear ground, as well as the middle distance preferred by most directors. By 1910 he was using close-ups to reveal significant details of the scene or of the acting and extreme long shots to achieve a sense of spectacle and distance. His appreciation of the camera’s possibilities produced novel dramatic effects. By splitting an event into fragments and recording each from the most suitable camera position, he could significantly vary the emphasis from camera shot to camera shot.

　　Griffith also achieved dramatic effects by means of creative editing. By juxtaposing images and varying the speed and rhythm of their presentation, he could control the dramatic intensity of the events as the story progressed. Despite the reluctance of his producers, who feared that the public would not be able to follow a plot that was made up of such juxtaposed images, Griffith persisted, and experimented as well with other elements of cinematic syntax that have become standard ever since. These included the flashback, permitting broad psychological and emotional exploration as well as narrative that was not chronological, and the crosscut between two parallel actions to heighten suspense and excitement. In thus exploiting fully the possibilities of editing, Griffith transposed devices of the Victorian novel to film and gave film mastery of time as well as space.

　　Besides developing the cinema’s language, Griffith immensely broadened its range and treatment of subjects.

Practically speaking, the artistic maturing of the cinema was the single-handed achievement of David W. Griffith (1875-1948). Before Griffith, photography in dramatic films consisted of little more than placing the actors before a stationary camera and showing them in full length as they would have appeared on stage. From the beginning of his career as a director, however, Griffith, because of his love of Victorian painting, employed composition. He conceived of the camera image as having a foreground and a rear ground, as well as the middle distance preferred by most directors. By 1910 he was using close-ups to reveal significant details of the scene or of the acting and extreme long shots to achieve a sense of spectacle and distance. His appreciation of the camera’s possibilities produced novel dramatic effects. By splitting an event into fragments and recording each from the most suitable camera position, he could significantly vary the emphasis from camera shot to camera shot.

　　Griffith also achieved dramatic effects by means of creative editing. By juxtaposing images and varying the speed and rhythm of their presentation, he could control the dramatic intensity of the events as the story progressed. Despite the reluctance of his producers, who feared that the public would not be able to follow a plot that was made up of such juxtaposed images, Griffith persisted, and experimented as well with other elements of cinematic syntax that have become standard ever since. These included the flashback, permitting broad psychological and emotional exploration as well as narrative that was not chronological, and the crosscut between two parallel actions to heighten suspense and excitement. In thus exploiting fully the possibilities of editing, Griffith transposed devices of the Victorian novel to film and gave film mastery of time as well as space.

　　Besides developing the cinema’s language, Griffith immensely broadened its range and treatment of subjects.

Practically speaking, the artistic maturing of the cinema was the single-handed achievement of David W. Griffith (1875-1948). Before Griffith, photography in dramatic films consisted of little more than placing the actors before a stationary camera and showing them in full length as they would have appeared on stage. From the beginning of his career as a director, however, Griffith, because of his love of Victorian painting, employed composition. He conceived of the camera image as having a foreground and a rear ground, as well as the middle distance preferred by most directors. By 1910 he was using close-ups to reveal significant details of the scene or of the acting and extreme long shots to achieve a sense of spectacle and distance. His appreciation of the camera’s possibilities produced novel dramatic effects. By splitting an event into fragments and recording each from the most suitable camera position, he could significantly vary the emphasis from camera shot to camera shot.

　　Griffith also achieved dramatic effects by means of creative editing. By juxtaposing images and varying the speed and rhythm of their presentation, he could control the dramatic intensity of the events as the story progressed. Despite the reluctance of his producers, who feared that the public would not be able to follow a plot that was made up of such juxtaposed images, Griffith persisted, and experimented as well with other elements of cinematic syntax that have become standard ever since. These included the flashback, permitting broad psychological and emotional exploration as well as narrative that was not chronological, and the crosscut between two parallel actions to heighten suspense and excitement. In thus exploiting fully the possibilities of editing, Griffith transposed devices of the Victorian novel to film and gave film mastery of time as well as space.

　　Besides developing the cinema’s language, Griffith immensely broadened its range and treatment of subjects.

With thunderclouds looming over the trans-Atlantic economy, it was easy to miss a bright piece of news last weekend from the other crucible of world trade, the Pacific Rim. In Honolulu, where Barack Obama hosted a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders, Canada, Japan and Mexico expressed interest in joining nine countries (America, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam) in discussing a free-trade pact. Altogether, the possible members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership(TPP) produce 40％ of world GDP—far more than the European Union.

　　Regional trade deals are not always a good idea. If they distract policymakers from global trade liberalization, they are to be discouraged. But with the Doha round of global trade talks showing no flicker of life, there is little danger that the TPP will derail a broader agreement; and by cutting barriers, strengthening intellectual-property protections and going beyond a web of existing trade deals, it should boost world trade.

　　The creation of a wider TPP is still some way off. For it to come into being its architects—Mr. Obama, who faces a tough election battle next year, and Japan’s Yoshihiko Noda, who faces crony politics laced with passionate protectionism-need to show more leadership.

　　Mr. Noda’s announcement on November 11th that Japan was interested in joining the TPP negotiations was an exceedingly bold move. Signing up would mean dramatic changes in Japan, a country which has 800％tariffs on rice and exports 65 vehicles to America for every one that is sent to Japan. Mr. Noda’s move could also transform the prospects of the TPP, most obviously by uniting two of the world’s leading three economies but also by galvanizing others. Until he expressed an interest, Canada and Mexico had also remained on the sidelines. Unwittingly or not, Mr. Noda has thrust mercantilist Japan into a central position on a trade treaty in which free movement of everything except labor is on the tabl

With thunderclouds looming over the trans-Atlantic economy, it was easy to miss a bright piece of news last weekend from the other crucible of world trade, the Pacific Rim. In Honolulu, where Barack Obama hosted a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders, Canada, Japan and Mexico expressed interest in joining nine countries (America, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam) in discussing a free-trade pact. Altogether, the possible members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership(TPP) produce 40％ of world GDP—far more than the European Union.

　　Regional trade deals are not always a good idea. If they distract policymakers from global trade liberalization, they are to be discouraged. But with the Doha round of global trade talks showing no flicker of life, there is little danger that the TPP will derail a broader agreement; and by cutting barriers, strengthening intellectual-property protections and going beyond a web of existing trade deals, it should boost world trade.

　　The creation of a wider TPP is still some way off. For it to come into being its architects—Mr. Obama, who faces a tough election battle next year, and Japan’s Yoshihiko Noda, who faces crony politics laced with passionate protectionism-need to show more leadership.

　　Mr. Noda’s announcement on November 11th that Japan was interested in joining the TPP negotiations was an exceedingly bold move. Signing up would mean dramatic changes in Japan, a country which has 800％tariffs on rice and exports 65 vehicles to America for every one that is sent to Japan. Mr. Noda’s move could also transform the prospects of the TPP, most obviously by uniting two of the world’s leading three economies but also by galvanizing others. Until he expressed an interest, Canada and Mexico had also remained on the sidelines. Unwittingly or not, Mr. Noda has thrust mercantilist Japan into a central position on a trade treaty in which free movement of everything except labor is on the tabl

With thunderclouds looming over the trans-Atlantic economy, it was easy to miss a bright piece of news last weekend from the other crucible of world trade, the Pacific Rim. In Honolulu, where Barack Obama hosted a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders, Canada, Japan and Mexico expressed interest in joining nine countries (America, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam) in discussing a free-trade pact. Altogether, the possible members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership(TPP) produce 40％ of world GDP—far more than the European Union.

　　Regional trade deals are not always a good idea. If they distract policymakers from global trade liberalization, they are to be discouraged. But with the Doha round of global trade talks showing no flicker of life, there is little danger that the TPP will derail a broader agreement; and by cutting barriers, strengthening intellectual-property protections and going beyond a web of existing trade deals, it should boost world trade.

　　The creation of a wider TPP is still some way off. For it to come into being its architects—Mr. Obama, who faces a tough election battle next year, and Japan’s Yoshihiko Noda, who faces crony politics laced with passionate protectionism-need to show more leadership.

　　Mr. Noda’s announcement on November 11th that Japan was interested in joining the TPP negotiations was an exceedingly bold move. Signing up would mean dramatic changes in Japan, a country which has 800％tariffs on rice and exports 65 vehicles to America for every one that is sent to Japan. Mr. Noda’s move could also transform the prospects of the TPP, most obviously by uniting two of the world’s leading three economies but also by galvanizing others. Until he expressed an interest, Canada and Mexico had also remained on the sidelines. Unwittingly or not, Mr. Noda has thrust mercantilist Japan into a central position on a trade treaty in which free movement of everything except labor is on the tabl

With thunderclouds looming over the trans-Atlantic economy, it was easy to miss a bright piece of news last weekend from the other crucible of world trade, the Pacific Rim. In Honolulu, where Barack Obama hosted a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders, Canada, Japan and Mexico expressed interest in joining nine countries (America, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam) in discussing a free-trade pact. Altogether, the possible members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership(TPP) produce 40％ of world GDP—far more than the European Union.

　　Regional trade deals are not always a good idea. If they distract policymakers from global trade liberalization, they are to be discouraged. But with the Doha round of global trade talks showing no flicker of life, there is little danger that the TPP will derail a broader agreement; and by cutting barriers, strengthening intellectual-property protections and going beyond a web of existing trade deals, it should boost world trade.

　　The creation of a wider TPP is still some way off. For it to come into being its architects—Mr. Obama, who faces a tough election battle next year, and Japan’s Yoshihiko Noda, who faces crony politics laced with passionate protectionism-need to show more leadership.

　　Mr. Noda’s announcement on November 11th that Japan was interested in joining the TPP negotiations was an exceedingly bold move. Signing up would mean dramatic changes in Japan, a country which has 800％tariffs on rice and exports 65 vehicles to America for every one that is sent to Japan. Mr. Noda’s move could also transform the prospects of the TPP, most obviously by uniting two of the world’s leading three economies but also by galvanizing others. Until he expressed an interest, Canada and Mexico had also remained on the sidelines. Unwittingly or not, Mr. Noda has thrust mercantilist Japan into a central position on a trade treaty in which free movement of everything except labor is on the tabl

With thunderclouds looming over the trans-Atlantic economy, it was easy to miss a bright piece of news last weekend from the other crucible of world trade, the Pacific Rim. In Honolulu, where Barack Obama hosted a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders, Canada, Japan and Mexico expressed interest in joining nine countries (America, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam) in discussing a free-trade pact. Altogether, the possible members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership(TPP) produce 40％ of world GDP—far more than the European Union.

　　Regional trade deals are not always a good idea. If they distract policymakers from global trade liberalization, they are to be discouraged. But with the Doha round of global trade talks showing no flicker of life, there is little danger that the TPP will derail a broader agreement; and by cutting barriers, strengthening intellectual-property protections and going beyond a web of existing trade deals, it should boost world trade.

　　The creation of a wider TPP is still some way off. For it to come into being its architects—Mr. Obama, who faces a tough election battle next year, and Japan’s Yoshihiko Noda, who faces crony politics laced with passionate protectionism-need to show more leadership.

　　Mr. Noda’s announcement on November 11th that Japan was interested in joining the TPP negotiations was an exceedingly bold move. Signing up would mean dramatic changes in Japan, a country which has 800％tariffs on rice and exports 65 vehicles to America for every one that is sent to Japan. Mr. Noda’s move could also transform the prospects of the TPP, most obviously by uniting two of the world’s leading three economies but also by galvanizing others. Until he expressed an interest, Canada and Mexico had also remained on the sidelines. Unwittingly or not, Mr. Noda has thrust mercantilist Japan into a central position on a trade treaty in which free movement of everything except labor is on the tabl

When the television is good, nothing—not the theater, not the magazines, or newspapers—nothing is better. But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there without a book, magazine, newspaper, or anything else to distract you and keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that you will observe a vast wasteland. You will see a procession of game shows, violence, audience-participation shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, Mayhem, more violence, sadism, murder, Western badmen, Western goodmen, private eyes, Gangsters, still more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly, commercials that stream and cajole and offend. And most of all, boredom. True, you will see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, try it.

　　Is there no room on television to teach, to inform, to uplift, to stretch, to enlarge the capacities of our children? Is there no room for programs to deepen the children’s understanding of children in other lands? Is there no room for a children’s news show explaining something about the world for them at their level of understanding? Is there no room for reading the great literature of the past, teaching them the great traditions of freedom? There are some fine children’s shows, but they are drowned out in the massive doses of cartoons, violence, and more violence. Must these be your trademarks? Search your conscience and see whether you cannot offer more to your young beneficiaries whose future you guard so many hours each and every day.

　　There are many people in this great country, and you must serve all of us. You will get no argument from me if you say that, given a choice between a Western and a symphony, more people will watch the Western. I like Westerns and private eyes, too—but a steady diet for the whole count

When the television is good, nothing—not the theater, not the magazines, or newspapers—nothing is better. But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there without a book, magazine, newspaper, or anything else to distract you and keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that you will observe a vast wasteland. You will see a procession of game shows, violence, audience-participation shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, Mayhem, more violence, sadism, murder, Western badmen, Western goodmen, private eyes, Gangsters, still more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly, commercials that stream and cajole and offend. And most of all, boredom. True, you will see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, try it.

　　Is there no room on television to teach, to inform, to uplift, to stretch, to enlarge the capacities of our children? Is there no room for programs to deepen the children’s understanding of children in other lands? Is there no room for a children’s news show explaining something about the world for them at their level of understanding? Is there no room for reading the great literature of the past, teaching them the great traditions of freedom? There are some fine children’s shows, but they are drowned out in the massive doses of cartoons, violence, and more violence. Must these be your trademarks? Search your conscience and see whether you cannot offer more to your young beneficiaries whose future you guard so many hours each and every day.

　　There are many people in this great country, and you must serve all of us. You will get no argument from me if you say that, given a choice between a Western and a symphony, more people will watch the Western. I like Westerns and private eyes, too—but a steady diet for the whole count

When the television is good, nothing—not the theater, not the magazines, or newspapers—nothing is better. But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there without a book, magazine, newspaper, or anything else to distract you and keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that you will observe a vast wasteland. You will see a procession of game shows, violence, audience-participation shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, Mayhem, more violence, sadism, murder, Western badmen, Western goodmen, private eyes, Gangsters, still more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly, commercials that stream and cajole and offend. And most of all, boredom. True, you will see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, try it.

　　Is there no room on television to teach, to inform, to uplift, to stretch, to enlarge the capacities of our children? Is there no room for programs to deepen the children’s understanding of children in other lands? Is there no room for a children’s news show explaining something about the world for them at their level of understanding? Is there no room for reading the great literature of the past, teaching them the great traditions of freedom? There are some fine children’s shows, but they are drowned out in the massive doses of cartoons, violence, and more violence. Must these be your trademarks? Search your conscience and see whether you cannot offer more to your young beneficiaries whose future you guard so many hours each and every day.

　　There are many people in this great country, and you must serve all of us. You will get no argument from me if you say that, given a choice between a Western and a symphony, more people will watch the Western. I like Westerns and private eyes, too—but a steady diet for the whole count

When the television is good, nothing—not the theater, not the magazines, or newspapers—nothing is better. But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there without a book, magazine, newspaper, or anything else to distract you and keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that you will observe a vast wasteland. You will see a procession of game shows, violence, audience-participation shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, Mayhem, more violence, sadism, murder, Western badmen, Western goodmen, private eyes, Gangsters, still more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly, commercials that stream and cajole and offend. And most of all, boredom. True, you will see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, try it.

　　Is there no room on television to teach, to inform, to uplift, to stretch, to enlarge the capacities of our children? Is there no room for programs to deepen the children’s understanding of children in other lands? Is there no room for a children’s news show explaining something about the world for them at their level of understanding? Is there no room for reading the great literature of the past, teaching them the great traditions of freedom? There are some fine children’s shows, but they are drowned out in the massive doses of cartoons, violence, and more violence. Must these be your trademarks? Search your conscience and see whether you cannot offer more to your young beneficiaries whose future you guard so many hours each and every day.

　　There are many people in this great country, and you must serve all of us. You will get no argument from me if you say that, given a choice between a Western and a symphony, more people will watch the Western. I like Westerns and private eyes, too—but a steady diet for the whole count

When the television is good, nothing—not the theater, not the magazines, or newspapers—nothing is better. But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there without a book, magazine, newspaper, or anything else to distract you and keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that you will observe a vast wasteland. You will see a procession of game shows, violence, audience-participation shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, Mayhem, more violence, sadism, murder, Western badmen, Western goodmen, private eyes, Gangsters, still more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly, commercials that stream and cajole and offend. And most of all, boredom. True, you will see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, try it.

　　Is there no room on television to teach, to inform, to uplift, to stretch, to enlarge the capacities of our children? Is there no room for programs to deepen the children’s understanding of children in other lands? Is there no room for a children’s news show explaining something about the world for them at their level of understanding? Is there no room for reading the great literature of the past, teaching them the great traditions of freedom? There are some fine children’s shows, but they are drowned out in the massive doses of cartoons, violence, and more violence. Must these be your trademarks? Search your conscience and see whether you cannot offer more to your young beneficiaries whose future you guard so many hours each and every day.

　　There are many people in this great country, and you must serve all of us. You will get no argument from me if you say that, given a choice between a Western and a symphony, more people will watch the Western. I like Westerns and private eyes, too—but a steady diet for the whole count

According to ( )， we could only say “The boy kicked the ball.” instead of “Boy the ball kicked the.”

Which of the following phrases is an example of an endocentric construction？

Who is called “father of English and European novels”？

( )is a representative writer ofAestheticism and Decadence.

Percy Bysshe Shelley was famous for( ).

Functional Sentence Perspective was put forward by ( )

The US formally entered the Second World War in( )

New Zealand is sometimes called the world‘s biggest farm.It is the world’s largest exporter of ( )

The nation′s capital city Washington and New York are located in ( )

As a revising chamber，the House of Lords is expected to( )the House of Commons.

How many morphemes are there in the word“discharged”？( )

Who was the first great American poet to use free verse？

The largest city in New Zealand is ( )

The largest city of British Columbia in Canada is ( )

The words “amaze” and “astound” are( ).

The study of the internal structure of words is ( )

Which of the following plays deals with the story that a linguist trains a flower girl to speak the SO-called civilized English？( )

Francis Scott Fitzgerald was famous for ( )

Walt Whitman was a(n)( )

What is the highest mountain in Britain？

Alexander Pope was the representative writer of ( ).

Which region in the U.S.contains 90% of theAmerican textile industry?

Science is a dominant theme in our culture. Since it touches almost every facet of our life, educated people need at least some acquaintance with its structure and operation. They should also have an understanding of the subculture in which scientists live and the kinds of people they are. An understanding of general characteristics of science as well as specific scientific concepts is easier to attain if one knows something about the things that excite and frustrate the scientist.

　　This book is written for the intelligent student of lay person whose acquaintance with science is superficial; for the person who has been presented with science as a musty storehouse of dried facts; for the person who has been presented with science as the production of gadgets; and for the person who views the scientists as some sort of magician. The book can be used to supplement a course in any science, to accompany any course that attempts to give an understanding of the modern world, or independently of any course—simply to provide a better understanding of science. We hope this book will lead readers to a broader perspective on scientific attitudes and a more realistic view of what science is, who scientists are, and what they do. It will give them an awareness and understanding of the relationship between science and our culture and an appreciation of the roles science may play in our culture. In addition, readers may learn to appreciate the relationship between scientific views and some of the values and philosophies that are pervasive in our culture.

　　We have tried to present in this book an accurate and up-to-date picture of the scientific community and the people who populated it. That population has in recent years come to comprise more and more women. This increasing role of women in the scientific subculture is not a unique incident but, rather, part of the trend evident in all segments of society as more women enter traditionally male-dominated fields and

Science is a dominant theme in our culture. Since it touches almost every facet of our life, educated people need at least some acquaintance with its structure and operation. They should also have an understanding of the subculture in which scientists live and the kinds of people they are. An understanding of general characteristics of science as well as specific scientific concepts is easier to attain if one knows something about the things that excite and frustrate the scientist.

　　This book is written for the intelligent student of lay person whose acquaintance with science is superficial; for the person who has been presented with science as a musty storehouse of dried facts; for the person who has been presented with science as the production of gadgets; and for the person who views the scientists as some sort of magician. The book can be used to supplement a course in any science, to accompany any course that attempts to give an understanding of the modern world, or independently of any course—simply to provide a better understanding of science. We hope this book will lead readers to a broader perspective on scientific attitudes and a more realistic view of what science is, who scientists are, and what they do. It will give them an awareness and understanding of the relationship between science and our culture and an appreciation of the roles science may play in our culture. In addition, readers may learn to appreciate the relationship between scientific views and some of the values and philosophies that are pervasive in our culture.

　　We have tried to present in this book an accurate and up-to-date picture of the scientific community and the people who populated it. That population has in recent years come to comprise more and more women. This increasing role of women in the scientific subculture is not a unique incident but, rather, part of the trend evident in all segments of society as more women enter traditionally male-dominated fields and

Science is a dominant theme in our culture. Since it touches almost every facet of our life, educated people need at least some acquaintance with its structure and operation. They should also have an understanding of the subculture in which scientists live and the kinds of people they are. An understanding of general characteristics of science as well as specific scientific concepts is easier to attain if one knows something about the things that excite and frustrate the scientist.

　　This book is written for the intelligent student of lay person whose acquaintance with science is superficial; for the person who has been presented with science as a musty storehouse of dried facts; for the person who has been presented with science as the production of gadgets; and for the person who views the scientists as some sort of magician. The book can be used to supplement a course in any science, to accompany any course that attempts to give an understanding of the modern world, or independently of any course—simply to provide a better understanding of science. We hope this book will lead readers to a broader perspective on scientific attitudes and a more realistic view of what science is, who scientists are, and what they do. It will give them an awareness and understanding of the relationship between science and our culture and an appreciation of the roles science may play in our culture. In addition, readers may learn to appreciate the relationship between scientific views and some of the values and philosophies that are pervasive in our culture.

　　We have tried to present in this book an accurate and up-to-date picture of the scientific community and the people who populated it. That population has in recent years come to comprise more and more women. This increasing role of women in the scientific subculture is not a unique incident but, rather, part of the trend evident in all segments of society as more women enter traditionally male-dominated fields and

Science is a dominant theme in our culture. Since it touches almost every facet of our life, educated people need at least some acquaintance with its structure and operation. They should also have an understanding of the subculture in which scientists live and the kinds of people they are. An understanding of general characteristics of science as well as specific scientific concepts is easier to attain if one knows something about the things that excite and frustrate the scientist.

　　This book is written for the intelligent student of lay person whose acquaintance with science is superficial; for the person who has been presented with science as a musty storehouse of dried facts; for the person who has been presented with science as the production of gadgets; and for the person who views the scientists as some sort of magician. The book can be used to supplement a course in any science, to accompany any course that attempts to give an understanding of the modern world, or independently of any course—simply to provide a better understanding of science. We hope this book will lead readers to a broader perspective on scientific attitudes and a more realistic view of what science is, who scientists are, and what they do. It will give them an awareness and understanding of the relationship between science and our culture and an appreciation of the roles science may play in our culture. In addition, readers may learn to appreciate the relationship between scientific views and some of the values and philosophies that are pervasive in our culture.

　　We have tried to present in this book an accurate and up-to-date picture of the scientific community and the people who populated it. That population has in recent years come to comprise more and more women. This increasing role of women in the scientific subculture is not a unique incident but, rather, part of the trend evident in all segments of society as more women enter traditionally male-dominated fields and

Science is a dominant theme in our culture. Since it touches almost every facet of our life, educated people need at least some acquaintance with its structure and operation. They should also have an understanding of the subculture in which scientists live and the kinds of people they are. An understanding of general characteristics of science as well as specific scientific concepts is easier to attain if one knows something about the things that excite and frustrate the scientist.

　　This book is written for the intelligent student of lay person whose acquaintance with science is superficial; for the person who has been presented with science as a musty storehouse of dried facts; for the person who has been presented with science as the production of gadgets; and for the person who views the scientists as some sort of magician. The book can be used to supplement a course in any science, to accompany any course that attempts to give an understanding of the modern world, or independently of any course—simply to provide a better understanding of science. We hope this book will lead readers to a broader perspective on scientific attitudes and a more realistic view of what science is, who scientists are, and what they do. It will give them an awareness and understanding of the relationship between science and our culture and an appreciation of the roles science may play in our culture. In addition, readers may learn to appreciate the relationship between scientific views and some of the values and philosophies that are pervasive in our culture.

　　We have tried to present in this book an accurate and up-to-date picture of the scientific community and the people who populated it. That population has in recent years come to comprise more and more women. This increasing role of women in the scientific subculture is not a unique incident but, rather, part of the trend evident in all segments of society as more women enter traditionally male-dominated fields and