2. 考研
  3. The Prestige of the Network Speech Violates a Question Nasty breakups are bad enough. But what if your ex broadcast your dir

The Prestige of the Network Speech Violates a Question Nasty breakups are bad enough. But what if your ex broadcast your dir

admin2013-04-03  48
问题             The Prestige of the Network Speech Violates a Question
    Nasty breakups are bad enough. But what if your ex broadcast your dirty laundry to millions? That’s what British actress Tricia Walsh Smith did notoriously on April 10, when she posted the YouTube videos in which she slammed her soon-to-be-ex-husband for everything. Walsh Smith’s videos, which were collectively viewed more than 4 million times, reflect more than just the despair of a deserted woman. They’re part of a larger and fast-growing problem: reputation-wrecking online.
     (1)______" Now we have this giant megaphone of the Internet, where every little whisper about someone shows up in Google," says Matt Zimmerman, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
     (2)______Many try to discredit their attackers by posting a rebuttal to the offending post or by asking website managers to remove disagreeable material. Some folks sue their critics for defamation. Still others take the ultimate step, hiring online-reputation-management firms to help re-craft their Web image.
    If you had the resources, you could always launch your own counterattack. Bara-ck Obama, frustrated with the false rumors being spread about his background and religious history, created a website called Fight The Smears to expose them.
     (3)______ But to win a case, you’d have to prove that intentionally false statements have damaged a lot more than just your feelings. You would also have to know whom exactly to sue, which can be virtually impossible since so many Web posts are anonymous. What’s more, the 1996 Communications Decency Act frees site operators from any liability for posts made by visitors to their sites. "It is ridiculous how you can post something on the Internet and not be accountable for it," says Chris Martin, founder of the online-reputation-management firm Reputation Hawk.
     (4)______"We call the top five search results the ’ danger zone’, because you don’t even have to scroll down to see them," says Martin. For $ 1,500 a month, Reputation Hawk will actually create new Web pages that cast you in a positive light (usually with your name in the URL), post links to positive Web mentions of you and start positive blogs. ( Keeping the blogs up-to-date is your responsibility, however.)
     (5)______ "The answer to bad speech is more speech," says Google’s Matt Cutts, who’s in charge of ranking search results. To start, he suggests setting up a free Google Alert, which e-mails you every time your name appears in a blog post or on a website; this at least lets you know if you have a problem and, often, with whom.
    The upside of the ever churning online rumor mill is that it does justice to those subjects who have come by their bad reputations legitimately. For bad guys, the megaphone of the Web can be a very useful thing. For everybody else, it’s nice to know that when the virtual community starts to whisper, you can now shout back.
    The following parapraph are given in a wrong order. For Questions 1—5, you are required to reorganize these paragraphs into a coherent text by choosing from the list A—G to filling them into the numbered boxes.
[A] The primary goal of online-reputation-management firms is to delete the first page of a client’s Google search results of all negative links.
[B] Disadvantageous comments spread easily online, but in the real world, they are often easily forgotten. The same kind of malicious statement posted online can spread farther and last forever.
[C] Once you’ve found your critics, you have to figure out what to say. The right response will get you everywhere.
[D] These days, as more and more people join social-networking sites, personal attacks against individuals and dusinesses on the Web are being taken more seriously than ever.
[E] If you don’t have a few thousand dollars to spare, a more reasonable approach is to confront your detractors directly.
[F] Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales was notoriously outed in 2005 for attempting to whitewash his own entry on the site.
[G] If you can’t mute your critics on your own, suing them for defamation might seem like the most effective way to stop the problem.
选项
答案G
解析 在第三段中提到了对待网络流言的几种做法，而第四段中说的是利用个人所有的资源发动反击。“可是如果你个人不能消除这些流言，控告他们诽谤可能是对付它的最有效的方式。”接下来，本段主要说明了由于种种原因，针对网络毁谤发起诉讼并不容易，因此正确答案为[G]。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/NisRFFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)