Text 3
“There is one and only one social responsibility of businesses,” wrote Milton Friedman, a Nobel prize-winning economist, “That is, to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits.” But even if you accept Firedman’s premise and regard corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies as a waste of shareholders’ money, things may not be absolutely clear-cut. New research suggests that CSR may create monetary value for companies-at least when they are prosecuted for corruption.
The largest firms in America and Britain together spend more than $ 15 billion a year on CSR, according to an estimate by EPG, a consulting firm. This could add value to their businesses in three ways. First, consumers may take CSR spending as a “signal” that a company’s products are of high quality. Second, customers may be willing to buy a company’s products as an indirect way to donate to the good causes it helps. And third, through a more diffuse “halo effect,” whereby its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others.
Previous studies on CSR have had trouble differentiating these effects because consumers can be affected by all three. A recent study attempts to separate them by looking at bribery prosecutions under America’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). It argues that since prosecutors do not consume a company’s products as part of their investigations, they could be influenced only by the halo effect.
The study found that, among prosecuted firms, those with the most comprehensive CSR programmes tended to get more lenient penalties. Their analysis ruled out the possibility that it was firms’ political influence, rather than their CSR stand, that accounted for the leniency: Companies that contributed more to political campaigns did not receive lower fines.
In all, the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits, they do seem to be influenced by a company’s record in CSR. “We estimate that either eliminating a substantial labour-rights concern, such as child labour or increasing corpora giving by about 20% results in fines that generally are 40% lower than the typical punishment for briding foreign officials,” says one researcher.
Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question of how much businesses ought to spend on CSR. Nor does it reveal how much companies are banking on the halo effect rather than the other possible benefits, when they decide their do-gooding policies. But at least they have demonstrated that when companies get into trouble with the law, evidence of good character can win them a less costly punishment.
31. The author views Milton Friedman’s statement about CSR with
[A] tolerance
[B] skepticism
[C] uncertainty
[D] approval
【答案】[B]
【解析】觀點(diǎn)態(tài)度題。題干問(wèn)的是作者對(duì)有關(guān)CSR方面Milton Friedman的說(shuō)法是什么態(tài)度。根據(jù)信號(hào)詞Milton Friedman這個(gè)人定位到首段。注意題干問(wèn)的是作者的看法，因此定位到第二句but轉(zhuǎn)折處。But后句子的主干為：things may not be absolutely clear-cut，可見(jiàn)作者對(duì)Milton Friedman所說(shuō)的內(nèi)容并不完全贊同，故選擇答案[B]項(xiàng)懷疑。[A]項(xiàng)容忍，[C]項(xiàng)不確定，[D]項(xiàng)贊同，這三項(xiàng)均不是作者的態(tài)度，故排除。
32. According to Paragraph 2, CSR helps a company by
[A] winning trust from consumers.
[B] guarding it against malpractices.
[C] protecting it from being defamed.
[D] raising the quality of its products.
【答案】[A]
【解析】細(xì)節(jié)題。根據(jù)題干中的出處提示“Paragraph 2”定位到第二段第二句：This could add value to their businesses in three ways. This指的是CSR，根據(jù)接下來(lái)講到的三點(diǎn)：第一點(diǎn)是，消費(fèi)者認(rèn)為這樣的公司產(chǎn)品質(zhì)量比較高；第二點(diǎn)是，顧客更愿意購(gòu)買這樣公司的產(chǎn)品；第三點(diǎn)是，通過(guò)一個(gè)更為廣泛的“暈輪效應(yīng)”，消費(fèi)者會(huì)更多地考慮這樣的公司的產(chǎn)品。可知，有CSR支出的公司會(huì)吸引更多的消費(fèi)者，[A]項(xiàng)“贏得消費(fèi)者的信任”，是對(duì)整個(gè)三點(diǎn)的總結(jié)，故為正確答案。[B]項(xiàng) 防止公司里的玩忽職守，[C]項(xiàng) 保護(hù)公司免受毀謗，[D]項(xiàng) 提升公司產(chǎn)品的質(zhì)量，均在原文中未提及，故排除。
33. The expression “more lenient’ (Line 2, Para. 4) is closest in meaning to
[A] more effective
[B] less controversial
[C] less severe
[D] more lasting
【答案】[C]
【解析】猜詞題。根據(jù)題干中的出處提示“l(fā)ine 2, para. 4”及信號(hào)詞“more lenient”定位到原文中的第四段第一句：The study found that...penalties。明顯此句中more lenient 修飾 penalties(懲罰) ，要想推測(cè)出more lenient的含義，需要知道被起訴的公司中，那些有著全面的CSR項(xiàng)目的公司和penalties 之間的聯(lián)系。本項(xiàng)在第五段的最后一句最容易被看出來(lái)，第五段最后一句提到那些在CSR有較大投資的公司，當(dāng)被起訴有賄賂行為時(shí)，所受到的罰金要比通常的罰金低40%左右，可知這樣的公司會(huì)受到較輕的懲罰，故more lenient是較輕，即較不嚴(yán)重的意思，故選[C]項(xiàng)。[A]項(xiàng) 更有效的，[B]項(xiàng) 較少有爭(zhēng)議的，[D]項(xiàng) 更持久的，這三項(xiàng)均不是more lenient的意思，故排除。
34. When prosecutors evaluate a case, a company’s CSR record
[A] has an impact on their decision.
[B] comes across as reliable evidence.
[C] increases the chance of being penalized.
[D] constitutes part of the investigation.
【答案】[A]
【解析】細(xì)節(jié)題。題干問(wèn)的是 CSR record 與 prosecutors evaluate a case 的關(guān)系，根據(jù)題干中的信號(hào)詞prosecutors evaluate a case可回文中定位到第五段第一句：In all...in CSR。這里的be influenced與[A]項(xiàng) has an impact 對(duì)應(yīng)，即一個(gè)公司的CSR會(huì)影響檢察官對(duì)其案件的評(píng)估，故選[A]項(xiàng)。[B]項(xiàng)被檢察官認(rèn)為是可靠的證據(jù)，[C]項(xiàng) 增加了被懲罰的機(jī)會(huì)，[D]項(xiàng) 構(gòu)成了調(diào)查的一部分，這三項(xiàng)均在原文中沒(méi)有提及，故排除。
35. Which of the following is true of CSR, according to the last paragraph?
[A] Its negative effects on businesses are often overlooked.
[B] The necessary amount of companies’ spending on it is unknown.
[C] Companies’ financial capacity for it has been overestimated.
[D] It has brought much benefit to the banking industry.
【答案】[B]
【解析】判斷題題干問(wèn)的是根據(jù)最后一段，有關(guān)CSR的論述哪個(gè)是對(duì)的。定位到原文最后一段，根據(jù)其內(nèi)容可知“研究人員承認(rèn)到其研究沒(méi)有回答如下問(wèn)題：公司應(yīng)該在CSR方面花費(fèi)多少錢”。[B]項(xiàng)的意思是“公司在CSR方面的花費(fèi)是未知的”，屬于原文的同義替換，故正確。[A]項(xiàng) CSR對(duì)公司的負(fù)面影響經(jīng)常被忽視，[C]項(xiàng) 公司對(duì)CSR的經(jīng)濟(jì)承擔(dān)力被過(guò)高估計(jì)了，[D]項(xiàng) CSR給銀行業(yè)帶來(lái)了很多好處，這三項(xiàng)在文中均為提及，故排除。
Text 4
There will eventually come a day when The New York Times ceases to publish stories on newsprint. Exactly when that day will be is a matter of debate. “Sometime in the future,” the paper’s publisher said back in 2010.
Nostalgia for ink on paper and the rustle of pages aside, there’s plenty of incentive to ditch print. The infrastructure required to make a physical newspaper-printing presses, delivery trucks — isn’t just expensive; it’s excessive at a time when online-only competitors don’t have the same set of financial constraints. Readers are migrating away from print anyway. And though print and sales still dwarf their online and mobile counterparts, revenue from print is still declining.
Overhead may be high and circulation lower, but risking to eliminate its print edition would be a mistake, says BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Pere.
Peretti says the Times shouldn’t waste time getting out of the print business, but only if they go about do, it the right way. “Figuring out a way to accelerate that transition would make sense for them,” he said, “but if you discontinue it, you’re going to have your most loyal customers really upset with you.”
Sometimes that’s worth making a change anyway. Peretti gives the example of Netflix discontinuing its DVD-mailing service to focus on streaming. “It was seen as a blunder,” he said. The move turned out to be foresighted. And if Peretti were in charge at the Times? “I wouldn’t pick a year to end print,” he said. “I would raise prices and make it into more of a legacy product.”
The most loyal customers would still get the product they favor, the idea goes, and they’d feel like they were helping sustain the quality of something they believe in. “So if you are overpaying for print, you could feel like you were helping,” Peretti said, “Then increase it at a higher rate each year and essentially try to generate additional revenue.” In other words, if you’re going to make a print product, make it for the people who are already obsessed with it, Which may be what the Times is doing already. Getting the print edition seven days a week costs nearly $500 a year — more than twice as much as a digital-only subscription.
“It’s a really hard thing to do and it’s a tremendous luxury that BuzzFeed doesn’t have a legacy business,” Peretti remarked. “But we’re going to have questions like that where we have things we’re doing that don’t make sense when the market changes and the world changes. In those situations, it’s better to be more aggressive than less aggressive.”
36. The New York Times is considering ending it’s print edition partly due to
[A] the pressure form its investors
[B] the complaints from its readers
[C] the high cost of operation
[D] the increasing online ad sales.
【答案】[C]
【解析】細(xì)節(jié)題。題干問(wèn)的是《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》考慮停止紙質(zhì)版新聞?dòng)∷⒊霭娴脑蚴鞘裁础Ｎ恼率锥问拙浼词谴藘?nèi)容的同義表達(dá)，第二段解釋具體原因，第二句：The infrastructure...isn’t just expensive; it’s excessive at a time when online-only competitors don’t have the same set of financial constraints. 意思是紙質(zhì)印刷所要求的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施不僅僅貴而且多余，因?yàn)樗麄兊木W(wǎng)絡(luò)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手沒(méi)有這樣的經(jīng)濟(jì)上的限制。[C]項(xiàng)“運(yùn)行的高成本”是對(duì)原文內(nèi)容的總結(jié)，故正確。[A]項(xiàng) 來(lái)自于投資者的壓力，[B]項(xiàng) 來(lái)自于讀者的投訴，[D]項(xiàng) 網(wǎng)絡(luò)廣告銷售的增長(zhǎng)，這三項(xiàng)在文中均未提及，故排除。
37.Peretti suggests that.in face of the present situation, the Times should
[A] make strategic adjustments
[B] end the print edition for good
[C] seek new sources of readership
[D] aim for efficient management
【答案】[A]
【解析】細(xì)節(jié)題。題干問(wèn)的是：面對(duì)目前的形勢(shì)，Peretti建議《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》怎么做。根據(jù)信號(hào)詞Peretti回原文中定位至第四段，首句內(nèi)容是Peretti說(shuō)《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》不該浪費(fèi)時(shí)間去想著如何停止紙質(zhì)印刷，而應(yīng)該找到一種正確的方法去解決這件事。接著第二句Peretti說(shuō)找到一種方式來(lái)促進(jìn)這種轉(zhuǎn)變會(huì)對(duì)他們來(lái)說(shuō)有用處�？芍狿eretti認(rèn)為《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》應(yīng)當(dāng)做出一些改變而非停止紙質(zhì)版的發(fā)行，[A]項(xiàng)“做出策略上的調(diào)整”是對(duì)原文的同義轉(zhuǎn)述，故正確。[B]項(xiàng) 永遠(yuǎn)結(jié)束紙質(zhì)版，與原文意思相反，故排除；[C]項(xiàng) 尋求新的讀者資源，[D]項(xiàng) 以高效的管理為目標(biāo)，在原文中未提及，故排除。
38.It can be inferred front Paragraphs 5 and 6 that a “l(fā)egacy product”
[A] will have the cost of printing reduced.
[B] is meant for the most loyal customers.
[C] helps restore the glory of former times.
[D] expands the popularity of the paper.
【答案】[B]
【題型】推斷題。
【解析】題干意思為：從第五、六段可以推斷出“傳承產(chǎn)品” 。根據(jù)信號(hào)詞legacy product定位到第五段最后一句：I would raise prices and make it into more of a legacy product.不僅要提高價(jià)格還要將它變?yōu)橐环N遺留品。單單這一句不足以做出選擇，需要繼續(xù)往下看在第六段中有沒(méi)有對(duì)于這個(gè)詞的解釋。第六段開(kāi)頭提到了他認(rèn)為大部分忠實(shí)的消費(fèi)者依舊會(huì)堅(jiān)持購(gòu)買他們喜歡的產(chǎn)品，而且他們會(huì)認(rèn)為是在幫助維持他們所信任的產(chǎn)品的質(zhì)量。可見(jiàn)Peretti認(rèn)為忠實(shí)的購(gòu)買者不會(huì)有改變，如果可以每年增加一些比例，那么依舊是可以創(chuàng)收的。緊接著出現(xiàn)了in other worlds(換句話說(shuō))，如果我們要做這些print product(印刷產(chǎn)品)，那就為那些已經(jīng)癡迷于他們的人而做吧。[B]項(xiàng)“是為多數(shù)忠實(shí)的顧客設(shè)計(jì)的”，是對(duì)原文內(nèi)容的同義替換，為正確答案。[A]項(xiàng) 會(huì)降低印刷成本，[C]項(xiàng) 重建以往的榮耀，[D]項(xiàng) 擴(kuò)大報(bào)紙的受歡迎程度，這三項(xiàng)均在文中未提及，故排除。
39. Peretti believes that in a changing world,
[A] traditional luxuries can stay unaffected.
[B] aggressiveness better meets challenges.
[C] cautiousness facilitates problem-solving.
[D] legacy businesses are becoming outdated.
【答案】[B]
【題型】細(xì)節(jié)題。
【解析】題干以為：Peretti認(rèn)為，在一個(gè)變化的世界里 。根據(jù)信號(hào)詞Peretti和changing world可回文中定位到文章最后一段，由最后一段可知Peretti認(rèn)為在市場(chǎng)在變化、世界在變化的情況中，更有進(jìn)取心是更好的。[B]項(xiàng)“進(jìn)取精神可以更好地迎接挑戰(zhàn)”，本項(xiàng)是對(duì)原文的同義轉(zhuǎn)述，故正確。[A]項(xiàng) 傳統(tǒng)的奢侈品不會(huì)受到影響，在文中未提及，故排除；[C]項(xiàng) 謹(jǐn)慎小心促進(jìn)問(wèn)題的解決，與原文意思相反，故排除；[D]項(xiàng) 傳統(tǒng)產(chǎn)業(yè)正在變得過(guò)時(shí)，在文中未提及，故排除。
40 . Which of the following would be the best title of the text
[A] Make Your Print Newspaper a Luxury Good
[B] Keep Your Newspaper Forever in Fashion
[C] Cherish the Newspaper Still in Your Hand
[D] Shift to Online Newspapers All at Once
【答案】[A]
【題型】主旨題。
【解析】全文由《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》紙質(zhì)版終有一天會(huì)面臨倒閉的危機(jī)引出話題，重點(diǎn)闡述Peretti對(duì)此問(wèn)題的看法：《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》紙質(zhì)版應(yīng)該考慮轉(zhuǎn)型——為大部分忠實(shí)的顧客提供遺留品。后面接著闡述了如何將《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》做成這種專為忠實(shí)的顧客制作的高價(jià)遺留品。[A]項(xiàng)“將你的印刷報(bào)紙做成一個(gè)奢侈品”，a luxury good是對(duì)原文中提到的高價(jià)“l(fā)egacy product”的同義轉(zhuǎn)述，故正確。B.始終保持你的報(bào)紙時(shí)尚前沿，[C]項(xiàng) 珍惜你手中仍然擁有的報(bào)紙，[D]項(xiàng) 立刻轉(zhuǎn)向網(wǎng)絡(luò)在線報(bào)紙，均不是本文要的主旨，故排除。
