在线国产一区二区_成人黄色片在线观看_国产成人免费_日韩精品免费在线视频_亚洲精品美女久久_欧美一级免费在线观看

English 中文網 漫畫網 愛新聞iNews 翻譯論壇
中國網站品牌欄目(頻道)
當前位置: Language Tips> 譯通四海> Columnist 專欄作家> Raymond Zhou

Reader beware ...

[ 2009-12-28 10:19]     字號 [] [] []  
免費訂閱30天China Daily雙語新聞手機報:移動用戶編輯短信CD至106580009009

While the Internet is a valuable platform for news and views, it is also a tool for deceit and demagoguery ...

To those who believe the Internet is the most vibrant democracy of all, the following news may come as a rude awakening. In China there is a cottage industry that pays people to act as if they are the voices of the public.

I'm not talking about experts and columnists whose opinions are so valued that websites pay them to write. Nor am I referring to public relations notices that tout specific products or services.

The people in question extol something not because they truly feel it is good, and they rage not because they are indignant. Rather, they are a hired army of public opinion imposters.

A recent report revealed that the going rate for such a campaign averages 50,000 yuan ($7,315). One firm boasted it has the most "experienced team", with access to 100,000 freelancers, that can post thousands of articles on up to five popular forums and blog hosting sites, creating 200,000-400,000 visits. And they guarantee a quick sensation.

It seems the current pay for one posting is 50 cents. A typical job posting for this type of work says you can make 40 yuan a day by working two hours, which they say translates to 80 posts. It is my impression this is probably a short paragraph copied and pasted at lightning-fast speed with absolutely no customization.

In a September piece, Time magazine reported on a company that pays for "sponsored tweets". It had signed up 7,000 Twitter users. The biggest difference with the hired guns in China is the lack of proper disclosure.

Chinese marketers would laugh their heads off if their online pluggers were so foolish as to announce their true identity. The beauty of online plugging is hidden identity. Call me a cynic, but I never harbored any illusion about the Internet as a democratizing platform. Back in the days of Web 1.0, I witnessed how people manipulated it to their benefit.

A person I know worked at the entertainment channel of one of the most popular portal sites in China. Talent agencies would wine and dine him, beautiful starlets would snuggle up to him, red envelopes would be slipped into his pockets - all for the purpose of masquerading press releases as entertainment news. Pretty soon the guy was so flushed with money he opened a side business in a busy shopping district.

And this happened when outsiders lauded the media outlet he worked for as an open and democratic alternative to the establishment.

It doesn't really take inside information to know that most of the entertainment articles on China's major websites are not really news. But ordinary netizens cannot tell the difference. As long as what's posted is not too outrageous or dumb, people will buy it and nobody will feel it's a violation of their right to accurate information.

What's happening now is much worse, or the perpetrators wouldn't be called an "online black society". As the Internet is flooded with all kinds of rubbish, it is more difficult to hype something than to attack it. So, instead of raving about how wonderful your product is, it is better to wage a smear campaign against your rival. So, you say, your neighbor's toddler got sick from using that product and see its sales plummet. By the time the rival company clears things up and government agencies have come forward, the damage is done and there'll be an inkling of odium forever associated with that brand.

I can understand why people are willing to take on this kind of job. It's determined by supply and demand. Most of the job ads target "college graduates", testifying to the gloomy job prospects for this demographic. It is much more interesting to dissect why this kind of guerrilla tactic works on those who receive it - I assume it works better in China than elsewhere.

We don't have a tradition of fair play in the media industry. Whoever controls information has a natural inclination to twist it to their own advantage. For example, our press has the habit of mixing reporting with commentary. We use colorful adjectives to describe something that should be reported without bias or judgment. We equate one man's opinion with the stand of the outlet that published it.

The result is a double whammy: Many words have turned into clichs and lost their effectiveness; but many in the audience are accustomed to the practice and they no longer use analytical power when sifting through the ever larger flow of information. They used to be wary of the spin of what they read or watched, but are now so carried away by the "anyone can shout" environment of the Internet they have relaxed their vigilance. Because Web content is less censored it is more credible, they assume.

While it may take years to lead a large population astray with deliberate disinformation on traditional media platforms, it sometimes takes just one writer and one editor to launch a massive misinformation campaign on the Web. Someone fabricates a sensational story, the editors give it prominence and voila, an online rebellion is born.

It happened to me recently. The Chinese translation of a column of mine was reposted by a popular blogger who attacked me for being one of these "50-cent guerillas", working for the establishment. The funny thing is, he interpreted my argument to mean the opposite of what I meant. Either he did it deliberately, or he did not read to the end, or he did not get the message of my article. Of the hundreds of thousands who left feedback, most simply heaped vituperation on me, and only a handful said: "Wait a minute. This is not what Raymond Zhou meant. He was misinterpreted."

A week later, I posted a paragraph-by-paragraph clarification of my original article, and the abovementioned blogger sent word that he understood me perfectly, but it did not matter. There was never a chance for rational discourse.

Independence of thinking is paramount in a civic society. But it'll be a long time before China's Internet world reaches that stage. As it stands, it is a hotbed for deceit and demagoguery, often overwhelming content with value. Just as panhandling kids on Chinese streets are usually controlled by gangs and therefore abuse our charity, the melodramatic stories that surface online are not to be trusted - unless you first trust the sources.

raymondzhou@chinadaily.com.cn

我要看更多專欄文章

相關閱讀:

Digital Robin Hoods?

Original pirate material

My pen pal Han Han

Saintly sinner of Shaolin temple

(作者周黎明 中國日報網英語點津 編輯陳丹妮)

 

 
中國日報網英語點津版權說明:凡注明來源為“中國日報網英語點津:XXX(署名)”的原創作品,除與中國日報網簽署英語點津內容授權協議的網站外,其他任何網站或單位未經允許不得非法盜鏈、轉載和使用,違者必究。如需使用,請與010-84883631聯系;凡本網注明“來源:XXX(非英語點津)”的作品,均轉載自其它媒體,目的在于傳播更多信息,其他媒體如需轉載,請與稿件來源方聯系,如產生任何問題與本網無關;本網所發布的歌曲、電影片段,版權歸原作者所有,僅供學習與研究,如果侵權,請提供版權證明,以便盡快刪除。
 

關注和訂閱

人氣排行

翻譯服務

中國日報網翻譯工作室

我們提供:媒體、文化、財經法律等專業領域的中英互譯服務
電話:010-84883468
郵件:translate@chinadaily.com.cn
 
 
主站蜘蛛池模板: 国产亚洲一区二区av | 欧美日韩精品一区二区 | 黄色精品一区二区 | 亚洲精品一区在线观看 | 久久国产经典视频 | 国产日产久久欧美清爽 | 在线国产一区 | 国产一区二区精品 | 国产精品美女久久久久aⅴ国产馆 | 精品久久久久久国产 | 国产最新网站 | 成人国产精品久久久 | 九九视频这里只有精品 | 日韩一区欧美 | 销魂美女一区二区三区视频在线 | 精品一区二区三区在线观看 | 国产99久久精品一区二区永久免费 | 黄色毛片一级 | 久久精品视频7 | 日韩精品一区二区三区中文在线 | 国产精品久久免费视频 | 毛片黄片免费看 | 亚洲国产成人在线 | 日本一区二区久久 | 国产成人涩涩涩视频在线观看 | 欧美第7页 | 国产人久久人人人人爽 | 国产精品久久久久9999 | 日日操夜 | 国产精品久久久久久久久久久新郎 | 亚州中文字幕 | 91精品视频一区 | 午夜视频在线观看网址 | 天天舔天天干天天操 | 久久视频精品 | 91精品久久久久久久久 | 天堂在线视频免费 | 成人精品 | 成人黄色免费网站 | 国产99久久久久久免费看农村 | 欧美在线观看一区 |