1 . When A33, a theater in Beijing, hosted a new stand-up comedy show（脱口秀), to the surprise of the organizers, nearly 250 people turned up and laughed together. Six years ago, that would have been unbelievable. Indeed, there were even cases of shows having more performers than viewers.
Wan Da, one of the performers, said, “Many people are worried about the future of stand-up comedy, a genre (类型) that is very popular in the U.S. after its introduction in China. Can it adapt itself here? But as the results show, there is no need to worry. We have survived and carried on some of the best American traditions.”
Programs such as Rock& Roast, a comedy talk show competition, which are thought to help people reduce their pressure, drive audiences to offline performances for a real laugh. “Generally, our audiences are in the 20-35 age group, but recently some older people are reported to go to the theatre,” said Song Qiyu, a performer and founder of Beijing Comedy Center.
Compared to traditional Chinese comedy performances, the stand-up comedy has a lower bar as it doesn't require years of professional training. This allows everyone to take part. Work experience and personal observations of life are the sources of their inspiration. Different lives and jobs make the performances varied, giving them unique individual colors.
Joe Wong, a humorist from Jilin province, whose performance in Washington, D.C. in 2010 attracted much attention across China's social media, is happy to see the development of the industry in China. However, he has a warning, too: There is huge space for the genre in China, but we should be careful of growing too fast as the market still needs good works.
In China, many fresh college graduates join. Through their efforts, the industry will improve its standards and popularity as well as influence.
1. What can we learn about the stand-up comedy from Paragraph 2?| A．It develops well in China. | B．It is created by Americans. |
| C．It faces an uncertain future. | D．It is very popular in Beijing. |
| A．They have a gift for talking. | B．It needs plenty of performers. |
| C．It needs no special backgrounds. | D．Most people have a sense of humor. |
| A．Learning from America. | B．Offering quality content. |
| C．Keeping creating works. | D．Employing fresh graduates. |
| A．The stand-up comedy: a rising industry | B．A33: a quickly growing comedy theatre |
| C．Why does the stand-up comedy get popular? | D．How does the stand-up comedy survive in China? |
2 . Reality TV show has been charged with making the nation silly, but a study suggests part of the show could be good for children.
Massey University PhD student Jacinta Hawkins looked at the influence of TV programs on kids’ health knowledge, attitudes and behavior. She said programs which showed overweight people on TV is making children say “I don’t want to grow up like that’.”
The research was part of Ms Hawkins’ paper on how schools improve health. She spoke to 92 children, ages from 7 to 13, from six Auckland primary schools to find out how they received information on nutrition and physical activity. Some said they learnt from TV news programs, but most of them mentioned reality shows such as Fat Chance, Honey We’re Killing the Kids and Downsize Me.
“ Earlier studies had looked at the effect junk-food advertising had on children,” Ms Hawkins said, “but messages within TV programs had not been explored. Children from the six schools largely recognized program content, rather than advertising, as a source of food and physical activity messages. They are learning habits of eating and exercise from TV programs. ”
The children also recognized that their parents had a role to play in shaping health behavior. Talking about Honey We’re Killing the Kids, which shows how people will look if they continue with good habits, children said they developed attitudes from their family’s habits. MMs Hawkins said children remembered what they had seen and thought it was the parents’ duty to lead by example.
1. What did Hawkins find about reality TV show?| A．It may teach kids much scientific knowledge. |
| B．Some shows may have kids develop ill habits. |
| C．Some shows may help kids eat more healthily. |
| D．It may draw kids’ attention away from studies. |
| A．Performing experiments. | B．Doing interviews. |
| C．Studying science reports. | D．Comparing earlier studies. |
| A．From health experts. | B．From news reports. |
| C．From television ads. | D．From TV shows. |
| A．School. | B．Friends. |
| C．Family. | D．Scientific research. |
3 . Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, believes it’s important to distinguish television’s influences on children from those of the family. We tend to blame TV, he says, for problems it doesn’t really cause, overlooking our own roles in shaping children’s minds.
One traditional belief about television is that it reduces a child’s ability to think and to understand the world. While watching TV, children do not merely absorb words and images (影像). Instead, they learn both explicit (明确的) and hidden meanings from what they see. Actually, children learn early the psychology of characters in TV shows. Furthermore, as many teachers agree, children understand far more when parents watch TV with them, explaining new words and ideas. Yet, most parents use an educational program as a chance to park their kids in front of the set and do something in another room.
Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn’t take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents’ educational background have a stronger influence on a child’s reading. “A child’s reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads.” Anderson says.
Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ (智商) scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it’s the other way around. “If you’re smart young, you’ll watch less TV when you’re older,” Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.
For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed, Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.
1. An educational program is best watched by a child _________.| A．on his own | B．with other kids |
| C．with his parents | D．with his teachers |
| A．Radio-listening. |
| B．Television-watching. |
| C．Parents’ reading list. |
| D．Parents’ educational background. |
| A．the more a child watches TV, the smarter he is |
| B．the younger a child is, the more he watches TV |
| C．the smarter a child is, the less likely he gets addicted to TV |
| D．the less a child watches TV, the better he performs at school |
| A．To advise on the educational use of TV. |
| B．To describe TV’s harmful effects on children. |
| C．To explain traditional views on TV influences. |
| D．To present Anderson’s unconventional ideas. |
