【案例】
]《青岛早报》--没有比你更无耻的媒体了
于 2010-7-30 21:01 |
本帖地址: http://club.bandao.cn/showthread.asp?boardid=101&id=1180144
作为党和政府的喉舌，作为青岛市委、市政府的主要宣传工具，《青岛早报》无耻的程度让人吃惊。一个媒体领导不去考虑如何办好报纸、如何提高读者忠诚度、如何提高业务水平，减少那些低级错误，而是用尽心思在考虑用那些很卑劣的手段来挖掘客户，逼迫客户刊登广告，这明显和我党和政府的要求方向不符。
首先我们来看看《青岛早报》今年的几次“事故”。
一：《青岛早报》再次刊出虚假新闻受到总署处罚 摘自《中国新闻网》
2009年2月3日，一条关于我海军护航编队的爆炸性“新闻”出现在各大网站上。文章称，1月15日，我海军在索马里海域实施护航任务的三艘战舰遭到“不明国籍的潜艇”跟踪，并最终在曼德海峡西海岸成功将其逼出水面，新闻配图使用的都是在印度洋海域频繁出没的印度海军潜艇。
这条爆炸性的消息发出后，国内主要新闻网站几乎都进行了转载并放在显著位置，也引起了境外舆论和国际社会的密切关注。在网上被广泛转载的这篇文章源自《华西都市报》和《青岛早报》的长篇纪实报道《剑指黄金水道——中国海军索马里护航》第22、23期，刊发日期为2009年1月18日和19日。经有关部门查实，这是一条不折不扣的假新闻，而假新闻的炮制者是一个名叫童其志的自由撰稿人。
日前，经相关部门调查取证，新闻出版行政部门已经对上述两家报社进行批评、处罚，并对相关责任人做出辞退、停职以及经济处罚等相关处理。3月4日，新闻出版总署对该事件予以通报，并将在近期对上述两家报纸重点审读，加强监管；同时，将该事件造假者列入新闻从业不良行为记录数据库，终身禁止从事新闻采编工作。四川和山东两省新闻出版局也分别给予两家报纸警告和罚款处分，勒令两报刊发更正致歉，并对相关责任人做出辞退或停职处理。
二：牛年最牛的错误----青岛早报把北京招商局大楼当做失火的央视大楼进行报道
今天看了《青岛早报》，当看到第19版专版报道《央视新址工地突发大火》和下面所配发的图片时，让我大吃一惊，既然发现一个牛年最牛的媒体张冠李戴错误，该报道所配发的资料照片，明显把位于东三环国贸立交桥东南侧的北京招商局大楼当做被大火烧掉的央视附属文化大楼，这样的低级错误既然在这样的一个媒体出现，可见责任编辑的无知和孤陋寡闻。
就这两起“事故”可见我们《青岛早报》这些管理人员的水平和业务能力，对我们青岛800万人民是怎样的实事求是和负责态度，当然这些不要紧，要紧的是怎样拉来广告，多赚点钱、多发点奖金、至于这样的一些错误，反正没有人跑到索马里、跑到北京去当地考察，没有关系，新闻总署的处理不也就是说处罚一点钱，加强审阅吗，动不了胫骨，再说了我也不直接归你新闻总署管啊，人事你说了也不算啊，我只听市委宣传部的。
今天负责我们这个口的业务人员打来电话，语气很坚定“我们这次的活动你们一定要参加，至少配合一个版面，如果你们参加了《半岛都市报》不参加我们的，我们将一定给与曝光。。。”
想想啊。。。这是什么世道？这不是要挟是什么？这不是逼迫是什么？这不是无耻是什么？难道我们还生活在被人任意宰割的社会吗？
为什么媒体会变成这样的明目张胆有恃无恐，不怕遭到处理。是的，我们来看看，有哪个部门会可以来监督媒体的？只有媒体可以肆意打着“舆论监督、媒体监督”的旗子来狐假虎威，利用国家垄断的资源为非作歹，说想曝光就曝光，随便自己填一个单子、打一个电话就说是有人投诉，不经过任何的调查取证立即一篇稿子出来，带有自己的主管意识。这就是他们的惯用手法。
我做媒体十多年，见过无数这样的卑劣手段来“敲诈”企业，作为一个有良知的公民、记者、新闻媒体人，我相信都会和这种现象进行不懈的斗争，因为我们相信真理，相信人性的真善美。。。。。。
125.67.147.* 楼主 08-06 12:37 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.2; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; MAXTHON 2.0)
Re:]《青岛早报》--没有比你更无耻的媒体了中国媒体篡改泰晤士报内容后在国内发表
文章提交者：25cm 加帖在 猫眼看人 【凯迪网络】 http://www.kdnet.net
泰晤士报标题： 中国未来将被老龄化所阻
中国国际广播在线标题：中国调整计划生育政策 改善人口老龄化
泰晤士报原文“This might not be “China’s century” after all”被译成
“但那并不影响21世纪成为“中国人的世纪”
这篇文章目前被多家媒体引用！！
据悉中国国际广播电台（CRI）创办于1941年12月3日，是中国向全世界广播的国家广播电台。其宗旨是“向世界介绍中国，向中国介绍世界，向世界报道世界，增进中国人民与世界人民之间的了解和友谊”。
以下是中国国际广播电台的文章网址
http://gb.cri.cn/27824/2009/08/03/2585s2580873.htm
《泰晤士报》:中国调整计划生育政策 改善人口老龄化
2009-08-03 14:02:55 来源：国际在线专稿 编辑：朱冀湘 发表评论 进入论坛>>
英国《泰晤士报》8月3日发表文章，关注中国积极调整现有计划生育政策。
原题：中国未来将被老龄化所阻(China’s future will be hobbled by old age)
国际在线专稿：20世纪70年代初，全世界女性平均每人生育4.3个孩子，一些贫穷国家的人口出生率更是高居不下。一些人口统计学家据此预测，全世界人口可能达到160亿以上，并时刻面临战争和饥荒的威胁。“人口大爆炸”的警报拉响后，世界各国都出台了自己的计划生育政策，中国也不例外。1979年，邓小平引入“独生子女”政策，严格控制人口过快增长。
这些政策取得的成果是巨大的，全世界70多个国家的人口出生率大幅下降。对于地球来说，这是个好消息，但却隐藏着危机：新生儿数量减少，人类平均寿命比100多年前增长了三四十年，但领取养老金的人越来越多，而劳动力却越来越少。统计学家预测，到2050年，将有20亿人(占全球总人口数量的五分之一)超过60岁。在发达国家，人口的三分之一都将是老年人。
人口老龄化造成的后果非常严重：劳动力短缺、经济增长缓慢等。计划生育政策给中国造成的影响更加严重，因为中国在步入发达国家行列之前，就已经开始面临人口老龄化的问题。实行独生子女政策6年后，中国劳动力开始缩水；预计到本世纪中期，中国劳动力数量将下降23%。届时，三分之一中国人口(4.38亿人)年龄将超过60岁。
此外，“独生子女”政策可能导致社会不稳定。随着大量企业关闭和私有化，给予工人住房、教育、医疗保障和养老金保障的“铁饭碗”也会逐渐消失。
中国目前的男女比例失衡令人头疼。现在，中国男性比女性多出5000万人，其中3270万人的年龄不到20岁。男女比例失衡意味着未来可能很多男性找不到老婆。
但令人欣慰的是，中国政府正在调整计划生育政策。为了缓解“四·二·一”家庭模式的负担，上海市政府已经率先宣布，鼓励符合条件的夫妻生育二胎。尽管中国的劳动力数量开始下降，但那并不影响21世纪成为“中国人的世纪”。(沈姝华)
泰晤士报原文如下：
China’s future will be hobbled by old age
Its one-child policy has given China a rich country’s problem: a rapidly ageing populationRosemary Righter
22 Comments
Recommend? (6)
Beware what you wish for. Birth control was one of the resounding policy successes of the last quarter of the last century. In the early 1970s, women worldwide were bearing an average of 4.3 children; populations in some of the poorest countries were doubling at breakneck speed and demographers were predicting that the world would contain 16 billion or more people before the demographic express hit the buffers of famine and war.
Alarmed, governments threw themselves into family planning — nowhere more strenuously than in China. In 1979 Deng Xiaoping unceremoniously binned Mao’s proclamation, “China’s strength is its countless people”, introducing a coercive “one child” policy buttressed by penalties ranging from heavy fines to compulsory abortions.
The turnaround has been dramatic. In more than 70 countries, birthrates have fallen below replacement level. The demographic timelag — babies born 30 years ago are now raising families — means that the global total continues gently to rise, but within 40 years should level out at a manageable 9 billion.
For the planet, this is good news; but the downside is a different, never before seen, demographic crunch. When people are not only having fewer babies, but living 30 to 40 years longer than they did a century ago, the result is more pensioners — and fewer workers to look after them. By 2050 two billion people — more than one in five — will be over 60. In rich countries, the proportion will be one in three. The implications are dramatic: labour shortages, slower growth, and higher taxes to pay bills for pensions and long-term care. The West’s problems are, however, nothing compared to the social and economic catastrophe shaping in China.
The one-child policy has, in its own harsh terms, worked: reducing births by between 300 and 400 million. But it has induced a premature, and alarmingly rapid, ageing process. China has given itself a rich country’s problem before it has become rich: for all its economic performance, Chinese incomes are still nowhere near as high as those in Western societies at the point when they started to age.
The one-child policy gave China the best of all worlds — a seemingly limitless labour supply and an artificially low dependency ratio. But the labour force will start shrinking a mere six years hence; elderly dependants will outnumber children within 20 years; and by mid-century the labour force will have plunged by 23 per cent. A third of Chinese will then be over 60 — 438 million, outnumbering the entire population of the US. And there will be only 1.6 working age adults per pensioner, compared with seven before 1979.
This means that hundreds of millions of elderly will depend on shrinking families. Beijing is reluctant to divert public investment from physical to social infrastructure; yet failure to do so will render the “harmonious society” unstable. Unpaid pensions are already a potent grievance.
Not only do safety nets barely exist, but the basic social services that communism used to guarantee are long gone. With the shutting or privatisation of state-owned enterprises, the “iron rice bowl” that gave factory workers housing, education, healthcare and pensions cracked two decades back. Rural workers — the majority even now — never had pensions and have now lost free education and healthcare as well.
China has compressed into a single generation transformations that would rock the stability of any society. But the consequences of the one-child policy may prove the toughest of all. Always an affront to human rights, it also portends economic trouble. Abortion rates are officially admitted to be appalling — 13 million a year, a statistic that does not include abortions performed in unregistered clinics or the 10 million one-off abortion pills sold every year. Not only that: in a statistic that has past, present and future heartache written all over it, in China today there are 50 million more males than females — of whom 32.7 million are under 20. A society already short of brothers and sisters is running short of daughters-in-law as well.
The rules have gradually been relaxed. In an effort to curb abortion of female fetuses and infanticide of baby girls, exceptions may be made for rural couples whose first child is female. To ease the burden known as 4-2-1 — only children may be little emperors when young, but end up burdened, under a law passed in 1996, with the obligation to care for two parents and four grandparents — couples from one-child families are allowed two babies. But when Shanghai last month announced that it would encourage “eligible” couples to have a second child, it was attacked in China’s official media for “talking as if Shanghai were an independent republic”.
After 30 years of indoctrination, China probably could not revert to big families even if it wanted to. Urbanisation leads to smaller families, and social mobility has weakened faith in more children as insurance for old age. China has no realistic choice but to grow old gracefully. But the cost of providing for tomorrow’s pensioners is bound to dampen growth even before the workforce starts to decline. This might not be “China’s century” after all.
http://club2.cat898.com/newbbs/d ... id=1&id=2952951
|
楼主: admin
楼主