大學英語新風尚第二冊綜合教程答案-資料下載頁

　　

【正文】 on, puter, mobile phone or a music player. Considering the current influence of media, we need to agree on the fact that media plays an important role in shaping up opinions of teenagers. Media is a doubleedged sword and hence there are positive effects of media as long as negative influences of media. One of the most positive effects of media today is the ease with which teenagers have learned to accept teenagers have no phobia for technology. Media has also contributed to increasing the overall awareness of teenagers about their surroundings. In addition to in overall knowledge and understanding of subjects owing to the vast information resulted that the media has to offer. If managed properly, media can be effectively used to generate awareness amongst teenagers about issues like sex, pregnancy, drugs, alcohol and smoking. There are several negative media effects on teenagers as well. Media is responsible for creating ideals about body image, owing to which several teenagers (especially girls) suffer from inferiority plex and resort to unhealthy practices to lose weight and get skinny. The amount of excessive violence in media — be it the television, movies or the video games, tends to increase aggressive tendencies in teenagers. The amount of celebrity hype created by the media causes many children to make irrational demands for designer clothing, and other luxuries of the celebrity life that they are exposed to. Glorification of unhealthy habits like smoking, drug abuse, unprotected sex and alcohol can encourage these habits in teenagers, which can permanently scar their lives. Unit 6 A news report from British pressure group Save the Children claims that economic growth does not necessarily translate into a healthier population. The report cites examples such as India, which still suffers high rates of child mortality despite having undergone a prolonged period of economic growth. This report says nothing new. Reading between the lines, it is a fairly standard call for governments to redistribute wealth and intervene more heavily in the economy, in order to iron out the inequalities which they perceive to perpetuate ill health. However, economic growth certainly dose improve health of the individuals who are able to benefit from it, not least because it enables people to afford better sanitation and living conditions, which are the key to reducing most of the disease burden in less developed countries. The point is that not everyone is able to share in economic growth, largely because of counterproductive governance. For example, if the poor do not have property rights, it makes it impossible for them to borrow capital to invest in their own business and education and climb up the economic ladder. Meanwhile, the poorest countries erect massive, costly regulatory obstacles to entrepreneurship, meaning that only the politically wellconnected and the rich can start businesses and create wealth. And so on. Save the Children is right to point out that the poor are till suffering unacceptable poor health as a result of poverty. Their diagnosis is way off the mark, however, because the redistributory measures they advocate would stifle economic growth and cut off the one mechanism that is vital for improving health. It would be more constructive for Save the Children to talk about empowering the poor instead of clobbering the rich