下载亿题库APP
联系电话:400-660-1360
请谨慎保管和记忆你的密码,以免泄露和丢失
请谨慎保管和记忆你的密码,以免泄露和丢失
为了帮助广大考生顺利通过口译笔译考试,帮考网为大家分享了一些口译笔译相关内容,希望大家每天坚持练习,积极备考。
Publish, perish, protest
Libel law in England is too expensive and restricts free speech. But journalistic dirty tricks are a disgrace and self-regulation of the media isn’t working properly. So the rules need lots of tweaks and a couple of big changes. Those are the conclusions of a much-awaited parliamentary committee report on the British press.
It makes uncomfortable reading for many. But the sharpest criticism was reserved for the News of the World, a tabloid that is Britain’s best-selling Sunday newspaper; its owner, Rupert Murdoch’s News International; and its practice of stealing messages from the voice mailboxes of prominent people, including members of the royal family. A reporter, Clive Goodman, was jailed for four months for the offence, later receiving a generous pay-off from his erstwhile employer for “unfair dismissal”.
The report says the number of phones hacked must have been far bigger than the handful admitted by the company, and calls it “inconceivable” that nobody else knew what was going on. It criticises the “collective amnesia” of the company’s witnesses and their “deliberate obfuscation” (some refused to give evidence; others said things that the MPs implied were untrue). But the report makes only indirect criticism of Andy Coulson, then the paper’s editor and now a close adviser to the Conservative leader, David Cameron. In response, News International rejected the allegations, accused the MPs of bias and said they had produced nothing new. Calls for a further inquiry are growing.
The report gives other journalistic misconduct a savaging too, especially the “abysmal” standards of reporting in the frenzy surrounding Kate and Gerry McCann, the parents of a British child who went missing in Portugal in 2007. (The McCanns later won hefty libel damages from newspapers that wrongly blamed them for abducting their own daughter.) The MPs also note that the McCanns were failed by the Press Complaints Commission, a self-regulatory body which is meant to deal with such conduct.
The committee’s original aim was to focus on media misbehaviour. But its investigation has ranged more widely. The report has plenty of comfort for more serious-minded journalists, as well as for the campaigning groups, scientists and others who worry about the chilling effect of libel law on press freedom. In English libel law (Scotland’s is different), the fact that the public has an interest in knowing about something offers only a limited defence against a charge of libel. (This is not unlike the rest of Europe, but it is shockingly different for Americans used to the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.) When sued, journalists usually have to prove that what they wrote was right, fair or at least conscientiously reported. That can be costly (even a preliminary defence can easily exceed £100,000). Foreigners may sue other foreigners, as long as they can show that their reputation was damaged in England.
Many lawyers and judges have dismissed media campaigns for changes in the law as self-interested. The committee rejects sweeping proposals for reform, such as statutory caps on the size of libel damages. But it does suggest that the Ministry of Justice, which is examining the libel law, make some important changes.
One is reversing the burden of proof for corporate claimants: if they want to sue for libel, they would have to show that the published material actually damaged their business. That could help people such as Simon Singh, a science writer facing a lawsuit from the chiropractors’ trade body for calling their treatments “bogus”. The MPs also want to discourage “libel tourism” by requiring a claimant who is not based in Britain to produce a very solid argument as to why the case needs to be brought there.
As for the cost of libel actions, which can be ruinous to all but the biggest defendants, the MPs have few specific ideas, though they appeal to lawyers’ sense of responsibility. That is about as realistic as urging tabloid journalists to act ethically.
词句笔记:
chiropractor:脊柱按摩师
tweak:n.调整
erstwhile:从前的
amnesia:健忘症
obfuscation:困惑
misconduct:n.行为不端
abysmal:深不可测的
bogus:假的,伪造的
看到这里小伙伴们是否有所收获呢?希望帮考网为大家分享的内容能给大家带来帮助,后续也可以多关注帮考网,这里有更多的考试资讯,你想知道的都在这!
中级口译的笔译证书有效期是多久?:中级口译的笔译证书有效期是多久?通过笔试考试后,2年内有4次口试机会。只有在规定时间内通过了笔试和口试成绩才能拿到相应的证书,否则笔试成绩就自动无效。一旦拿到证书,就是终身有效的。
三级笔译和口译考试每年可以考几次?:三级笔译和口译考试每年可以考几次?通常情况下笔译口译考试都是每年两次。上半年一般在1月份报名,5月份考试,下半年一般在7月份报名,11月考试,各省市情况不一,具体情况可上CATTI官网或各省市人事考试网查询。
口译证的含金量高吗?:口译证的含金量高吗?口译证是证明口译能力的证书,英语翻译证是从业资格证,一般找工作如果不是做专门翻译类的,口译证含金量是很高的。
2020-06-03
2020-06-03
2020-06-03
2020-06-03
2020-06-03
微信扫码关注公众号
获取更多考试热门资料