字神帝國英語天地

今日主題：Politicians vs. newspapers--Hold the presses (政客與媒體--媒體控制)
康康精選GRE&GMAT會考的主題，堅持每天精讀一定會進步的哦!

MP3音檔 (按右鍵可下載聽)：喜歡的同學，幫忙推或按讚哦~~
http://xia2.kekenet.com/Sound/2015/…/ecob1125_5902237Xwi.mp3　

只有音檔怎夠，聽不懂地方，不用怕，康康幫你準備好中英文稿了：

中英文稿：
Politicians vs. newspapers--Hold the presses
政客與媒體--媒體控制

The battle over newspaper regulation rolls into the long grass
新聞法規之戰 暫被擱置

“IT IS not even the beginning of the end, but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” That (quoting Winston Churchill) is one MP's verdict on Britain's battle over newspaper standards. His judgment, if grandiloquent, is accurate. The clash between politicians and newspapers, which began with the revelation in 2011 of widespread phone-hacking by a tabloid, appears to have reached a conclusion. On October 30th the government approved a new regulatory system to discipline Fleet Street misbehavior. But the hostilities have merely been postponed.
“那不是末日的開端，而可能是開端的終結。”這是某國會議員引用邱吉爾的名言對英國報紙標準做出的結論。如果極力誇大事態的嚴重性，他的評論則恰如其分。 從2011年沸沸揚揚的水門事件開始，政客與報章媒體之間的對抗似乎總算有了一個了結。10月30日，政府通過了一個新的管控系統來規範英國報業的不當舉 措。但這只是延緩了雙方的戰爭。

The new system is the product of months of debate and compromise. Reacting to the phone-hacking scandal, the government commissioned a judge to investigate press standards. Aftera tortuous, year-long inquiry, Lord Justice Leveson recommended a tough new regulator backed by legislation.
這一新的體系是數月以來辯論和妥協的產物。作為對水門事件的回應，政府委任一位法官去調查媒體標準。經歷了耗時一年的調查後，英國最高法院大法官Leveson提議要透過法律建立一個嚴厲的管控系統。

In March the three main political parties responded by proposing a royal charter—an ancient device seen as less offensive to a free press than statute would be. The charter provides fora regulator as well as a “recognition panel”, free from press or political control, to police its independence. The regulator could impose fines of up to ￡1m ($1.6m) on newspapers and insist on prominent corrections. The charter also exposes newspapers that refuse to join the regulatory regime to punitive damages if cases are brought against them.
3月，三個主要的政黨提出皇家特許狀作為回應—這是相較法律而言，對媒體攻擊性較小的古老手法。特許狀提出要建立管控論壇以及監管機構籌備組來管轄報業， 而這一機構既不受制於媒體，也不受制於政治團體。它可向報業徵收高達100萬歐元（合160萬美元）的罰款，且有權要求報業對報導內容作出重大更正。特許 狀也對那些拒絕加入監管體系的報紙發表聲明，若那些報社報導對他們不利的言論，他們有權對其徵收損害性賠償。

The large newspaper groups are having none of it. They claim the royal charter amounts to government meddling. On October 30th judges struck down their bid to delay its introduction.Hours later the royal charter received the queen's assent. Politicians declared their job complete.
大的報紙團體拒不買帳。他們聲稱皇家特許狀就相當於政府干預。10月30日，法官否決了他們企圖延遲特許狀問世的訴訟。幾個小時之後，皇家特許狀獲得了女王的應允。政客們也表示他們的任務圓滿完成。

Ministers hope that editors and owners will sign up to the new system in order to avoid being hit with punitive damages. Some MPs think an ongoing news story will help push them into line.The trial of Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, two former editors charged with authorizing illegal reporting methods, began on October 28th. On October 30th a jury was told that three former journalists had pleaded guilty to charges of phone-hacking.
部長們希望編輯和報刊所有者為了避免被索討損害性賠償，會選擇簽署加盟新的體系。一些國會議員也認為正在進行的報業整改有助於幫他們回到正軌。10月28 日，兩位前編輯Rebekah Brooks和Andy Coulson因批准非法報導管道而被法院起訴。10月30日，陪審團被告知三位前記者對監聽電話的指控供認不諱。

That is wishful thinking. Claire Enders, a media analyst, says there is “zero” chance of the big newspapers accepting the new regime. The largest groups have launched another legal challenge to it. They have also created an alternative system, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO). This will not comply with the royal charter—not least as it will have fewer powers and will not be completely independent of the press—but the businesses behind it have deep enough pockets to pay eye-watering damages, should it come to that. They will settle with victims of abuse more readily than before, reckons Ms Enders, who also doubts that the smaller newspaper outfits will sign up to the royal charter system.
媒體分析家Claire Enders稱讓大報接受新的體系絕無勝算，只能是癡心妄想。最大的報紙團體已經掀起了一場法律的挑戰。他們也創造了一個可供替代的體系，即獨立新聞標準 組織（IPSO）。這一體系不會遵守皇家特許狀—因為其權利較小，且並不完全獨立於媒體—但是如果局面真的一發不可收拾，其背後的企業便可提供足夠的財力 去償還(會讓人大哭的鉅額)損失。克雷爾恩德斯承認，相較過去，這會更加容易使誹謗受害者平息下來，但他也懷疑小的報紙會歸服於皇家特許狀。

The politicians' charter will find few or no takers, then—and will eventually crumple. That will happen slowly. The recognition panel, which will monitor progress, will not report on thesystem's success or failure until shortly before, or even after, the 2015 election. So there will be months of delay before another showdown between the press and MPs.
政客推出的特許狀幾乎沒有人願意接受—因而最終會面臨崩潰的局面。這個過程會很遲緩。監視此進程的監管機構籌備組不會把這一體系的成功與失敗於2015大選前後報導出來。因此，據媒體和國會議員之間攤牌還會有數個月的時間。

That suits many people just fine. Mr Cameron, wary of poisoning relations with the press and of Tory colleagues fiercely opposed to regulation, is happy to kick the matter into the longgrass. Those keenest on regulation—the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties and Hacked Off,a group representing press victims—want to give the charter time to work. Neither Labour nor the Lib Dems plan to question its success until the recognition panel has reported. The tabloid owners and editors are the happiest of all to play for time: the longer the politicians' system is delayed, the more time IPSO has to win acceptance. Legal challenges might delay the process further.
很多人對這一法規都沒有異議。Cameron誠惶誠恐地調節著和媒體之間的危險關係，處理著保守黨對這一法規的激烈反對，於他而言，他非常樂意把這件事擱 置一邊。對這一法規極度熱忱的黨派—工党，自由民主黨和受害者們（媒體受害者群）都想給皇家特許狀時間，讓其發揮作用。工党和自由民主黨計畫直到監管機構 籌備組報導時，再對其成功與否發出質疑。小報所有者和編輯則對這種時間遊戲歡欣不已：政客推出的體系耽擱的越久，獨立新聞標準組織（IPSO）就越有勝 算。法律的挑戰可能會進一步延緩整個過程。

Eventually, probably after the next election, the failure of the royal charter will force politicians back to the drawing board. Most in Labour and the Lib Dems, along with a minority of Tories, might then look to statutory regulation of the press—a prospect even less acceptable to the newspapers than the royal charter. The battle has been postponed. It will be even more vicious when it rejoins.
最終，或許就在下次大選之後，皇家特許狀的失敗會迫使政客們從頭開始。大多數工党、自由民主黨，以及保守黨一小部分黨羽可能都會預期立媒體相關法案—這是對媒體而言比皇家特許狀更難以接受的前景。這場戰役被延後，但當其捲土重來之時，殺傷力會更加劇烈。