演講者：Alisa Miller
演講題目: How the news distorts our worldview
How does the news shape the way we see the world? Here's the world based on the way it looks -- based on landmass. And here's how news shapes what Americans see. This map -- (Applause) -- this map shows the number of seconds that American network and cable news organizations dedicated to news stories, by country, in February of 2007 -- just one year ago.
新聞是怎樣塑造我們認識世界的方式呢？先看一張世界地圖，再看看如果按新聞報導數量劃分，美國人看到的「世界圖景」。在這張地圖中, 各個國家的報導比例是按照美國新聞機構報導世界各國新聞的秒數來劃分的，時間是2007年2月，也就是僅僅一年前。
Now, this was a month when North Korea agreed to dismantle its nuclear facilities. There was massive flooding in Indonesia. And in Paris, the IPCC released its study confirming man's impact on global warming. The U.S. accounted for 79 percent of total news coverage. And when we take out the U.S. and look at the remaining 21 percent, we see a lot of Iraq -- that's that big green thing there -- and little else. The combined coverage of Russia, China and India, for example, reached just one percent.
那個月發生的新聞包括：朝鮮同意拆除核設施。印度尼西亞大海嘯。聯合國政府專門委員會在巴黎全會上證實了，人類活動與全球變暖的關係。全部新聞中，美國新聞佔79%。除去美國，看看其餘的21%構成的「地圖」，其中大多新聞是有關伊拉克的，就是圖中的大塊綠色，其他國家佔的很少。俄羅斯、中國和印度的新聞僅僅佔1%
When we analyzed all the news stories and removed just one story, here's how the world looked. What was that story? The death of Anna Nicole Smith. This story eclipsed every country except Iraq, and received 10 times the coverage of the IPCC report. And the cycle continues; as we all know, Britney has loomed pretty large lately.
如果再分析一下這些新聞，然後僅僅排除掉一類新聞，世界看上去是這樣的。那個新聞是什麼呢？Anna Nicole Smith之死 [Smith為《花花公子》玩伴女郎，07年2月離奇猝死] 。從新聞報導數量上看，除了沒有超過伊拉克，Anna Nicole Smith之死超過各個國家，而且是報導IPCC報告數量的10倍。這種情況還在繼續，大家都知道布蘭妮最近很火。
So, why don't we hear more about the world? One reason is that news networks have reduced the number of their foreign bureaus by half. Aside from one-person ABC mini-bureaus in Nairobi, New Delhi and Mumbai, there are no network news bureaus in all of Africa, India or South America -- places that are home to more than two billion people.
為什麼我們聽到的世界新聞很少？原因之一是，新聞機構已經將他們的國外通訊分社數量減少了一半。除了美國廣播公司在奈洛比、新德裡和孟買的微型分社，非洲、印度和南美洲都沒有新的通訊社網絡，而這些地方的人口有超過20億。
The reality is that covering Britney is cheaper. And this lack of global coverage is all the more disturbing when we see where people go for news. Local TV news looms large, and unfortunately only dedicates 12 percent of its coverage to international news.
現實情況是，報導布蘭妮成本更低。如果看看人們獲取新聞的方式，全球新聞報導量的缺失情況就更讓人擔心了。人們大多通過本地電視獲取新聞，而不幸的是本地電視新聞中只有12%是國際新聞。
And what about the web? The most popular news sites don't do much better. Last year, Pew and the Colombia J-School analyzed the 14,000 stories that appeared on Google News' front page. And they, in fact, covered the same 24 news events. Similarly, a study in e-content showed that much of global news from U.S. news creators is recycled stories from the AP wire services and Reuters, and don't put things into a context that people can understand their connection to it.
那網際網路呢？最流行的網站也不見得做的更好。去年，皮尤研究中心和哥倫比亞新聞學院分析發現Google新聞首頁上的14000個報導。其實只是在重複24個新聞。同樣，一份有關網際網路內容的研究表明，美國新聞機構報導的世界新聞，都是在重複美聯社和路透社的報導，而且還試圖隱藏轉載的痕跡，讓描述語氣不至於讓人看出來。
So, if you put it all together, this could help explain why today's college graduates, as well as less educated Americans, know less about the world than their counterparts did 20 years ago. And if you think it's simply because we are not interested, you would be wrong. In recent years, Americans who say they closely follow global news most of the time grew to over 50 percent.
所以，想到所有這些，就能理解為什麼比起20年前的同輩們，現在的大學畢業生，還包括一些教育程度較低的美國人反而對世界了解的更少。如果認為大家只是對世界新聞不感興趣，那你就錯了。近幾年來，研究表明正一直密切關注世界新聞的美國人數比例已上升至50%。近幾年，一直密切關注世界新聞的美國人數比例已上升至50%。
The real question: is this distorted worldview what we want for Americans in our increasingly interconnected world? I know we can do better. And can we afford not to? Thank you.
真正的問題是：在世界愈發互聯的今天，這樣歪曲的世界圖景是我們美國人想要的嗎？我相信我們能做得更好。否則，後果我們能承擔麼？謝謝大家！！
Remark：一切權益歸TED所有，更多TED相關信息可至官網www.ted.com查詢！好消息又來啦！達達最近開通了視頻號，歡迎你們識別二維碼關注哦~我會發一些一分鐘的小視頻，可以提高聽力又能鍛鍊口語，來玩吧！PS：為了能幫助到更多小夥伴，我還開了新個人微信號▼