2 . Gather together a couple of good friends and take a leisurely stroll through the streets — this is what many youngsters in China enjoy doing when they visit a new city.

To them, Citywalk means “roaming around the city” on foot. Participants can follow a distinctive urban route, soaking up the atmosphere, exploring old buildings, browsing boutique shops, sipping a cup of coffee, or indulging in authentic local snacks.

Citywalk can be a special guided trip for a small group of people, or simply a leisurely stroll for one or two to explore new areas, sticking to the key point: avoiding famous scenic spots and big crowds to gain a more inclusive experience of the places you visit. Besides interacting with a city, Citywalk provides young people with a new social scene, where they who share the same interests and ideas can easily make friends.

In China, the Citywalk trend is spreading from first-tier cities like Beijing and Shanghai to second and third-tier cities, encouraging more participants and event organizers to get involved. Some organizers invite folk culture researchers and enthusiasts to act as tour guides. Xiao Yiyi, a young entrepreneur in Changsha, recently launched six Citywalk routes in different cities on her social media account, with the aim of providing experiences for visitors to “walk in open-air museums”. Her Changsha route features more offbeat sights like historical architecture from the 19th century, artsy old alleys, and even a stop-off to sample the local spicy crayfish specialty.

Even though Citywalk is a relatively new phenomenon, it is offering a positive change to urban travelers as they can better choose the experiences based on their interests and needs. At the same time, Citywalk represents an opportunity for tour guides and travel service providers to offer a more tailored, professional service to meet with ever-changing market demands.

3 . Television has transformed politics in the United States by changing the way in which information is spread, by altering political campaigns, and by changing citizen’s patterns of response to politics. By giving citizens independent access to the candidates, television reduced the role of the political party in the selection of the major party candidates. By centering politics on the person of the candidate, television accelerated the citizen’s focus on character rather than issues.

Television has altered the forms of political communication as well. The messages on which most of us rely are briefer than they once were. The stump speech, a political speech given by traveling politicians and lasting 1 to 2 hours, which was popular in the nineteenth-century, has given way to the 30-second advertisement and the 10 second “sound bite” in broadcast news. Increasingly the audience for speeches is not that standing in front of the politician but rather the viewing audience who will hear and see a short video of the speech on the news.

In these simplified forms, much of what comprised the traditional political speech of earlier ages has been lost. In 15 or 30 seconds, a speaker cannot establish the historical context that shaped the issue in question, cannot detail the probable causes of the problem, and cannot examine alternative proposals to argue that one is preferable to others. In short videos, politicians assert (断言) but do not argue.

Because television is an intimate (亲密的) medium, speaking through it requires a changed political style that is more conversational, personal, and visual than that of the old-style stump speech. Reliance on television means that increasingly our political world contains memorable pictures rather than memorable words. Schools teach us to analyze words and print. However, in a world in which politics is increasingly visual, informed citizenship requires a new set of skills.

Recognizing the power of television’s pictures, politicians craft televisual, staged events designed to attract media coverage. Much of the political activity we see on television news has been crafted by politicians, their speechwriters, and their public relations advisers for televised consumption. Sound bites in news and answers to questions in debates increasingly sound like advertisements.

4 . Nowadays, people are increasingly interacting with others in social media environments where algorithms control the flow of social information they see. People’s interactions with online algorithms may affect how they learn from others, with negative consequences including social misperceptions, conflict and the spread of misinformation.

On social media platforms, algorithms are mainly designed to amplify (放大) information that sustains engagement, meaning they keep people clicking on content and coming back to the platforms. There is evidence suggesting that a side effect of this design is that algorithms amplify information people are strongly biased (偏向的) to learn from. We call this information “PRIME”, for prestigious, in-group, moral and emotional information.

In our evolutionary past, biases to learn from PRIME information were very advantageous: Learning from prestigious individuals is efficient because these people are successful and their behavior can be copied. Paying attention to people who violate moral norms is important because punishing them helps the community maintain cooperation. But what happens when PRIME information becomes amplified by algorithms and some people exploit (利用) algorithm amplification to promote themselves? Prestige becomes a poor signal of success because people can fake prestige on social media. News become filled with negative and moral information so that there is conflict rather than cooperation.

The interaction of human psychology and algorithm amplification leads to disfunction because social learning supports cooperation and problem-solving, but social media algorithms are designed to increase engagement. We call it functional mismatch. One of the key outcomes of functional mismatch is that people start to form incorrect perceptions of their social world, which often occurs in the field of politics. Recent research suggests that when algorithms selectively amplify more extreme political views, people begin to think that their political in-group and out-group are more sharply divided than they really are. Such “false polarization” might be an important source of greater political conflict.

So what’s next? A key question is what can be done to make algorithms facilitate accurate human social learning rather than exploit social learning biases. Some research team is working on new algorithm designs that increase engagement while also punishing PRIME information. This may maintain user activity that social media platforms seek, but also make people’s social perceptions more accurate.

6 . It was rush hour in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania this September. Timothy White was ________ home when he noticed a gray four-door ________ on the opposite side of the street. It moved on ________. As the pickup drew closer, White spotted the ________ appeared to be asleep.

Pretty soon, this guy’s going to ________ into a house and kill himself or kill somebody else. White ________ to stop that vehicle. White made his car a U-turn and was now facing in the same ________ as the pickup, but there were four cars ________ them. White honked his horn, hoping the cars in front would move aside. They didn’t.

Trapped, White ________, jumped out and dashed up the sidewalk. The truck was going slowly. He ran around to the driver’s side. The window was down on this temperate ________ day. White grabbed the frame of the window and with a ________ strength, leaped in. White was now inside the truck.

The driver, Todd DeAngelis, was just a bit ________, unexpectedly facing dangerously low blood sugar. White worked quickly. He ________ the pickup into park and called the police.

An ambulance soon arrived and took DeAngelis to hospital. “You kept me ________ a much worse accident than it could have been,” DeAngelis said after his ________. “I’m always trying to help, where I can, when I can,” White smiled.

9 . Danone Portugal introduced a new yogurt named Juntos. For every pack of yogurt that a person bought, he would donate yogurt to a family in need. Danone had done its research. Increasingly, people say they want to buy from brands that give them a sense of purpose. Surely a yogurt that helped the needy would be appealing. But Juntos was a failure. Despite sinking millions into a marketing campaign, Danone pulled Juntos from the market only months after it was launched. Now the same product is simply marketed as a tasty yogurt.

What happened? To find the reason behind Juntos’ failure, Lawrence Williams and his colleagues did an experiment where they showed people some products and asked these people to pick one option. They reminded some to focus on the “purposeful and valuable” aspect while others were told to “enjoy themselves” and focus on “delight and pleasure.” They found that participants who prioritized meaning preferred the less expensive product when compared with people who put pleasure in the first place.

So why were meaning-seekers cheaping out? Lawrence Williams asked participants to explain their decision-making to find out. He learned that meaning-oriented people were not thinking about how the product they might buy could bring meaning to their lives. Instead, they were occupied with what else they could do with their money.

I am all for people making wise and strategic financial choices. But cheap products can create many problems. Inexpensive options often do not last as long as the higher-end ones. As a result, we shop more often, which is ultimately worse for our wallets. Plus, that spending pattern can do a greater damage to the environment. Thanks in part to fast fashion, people buy 60 percent more clothing today than they did 15 years ago. The fashion industry alone emits more greenhouse gases than international flights and maritime (海洋的) shipping combined.

So before you dive into your wallet for some deals, try not to fix only on what you are spending or saving. Think carefully about what you are buying, too.

10 . My son’s seventh birthday is approaching, so conversation at my house has naturally turned to organizing his party.

For his sixth birthday, we booked the local trampoline(蹦床) park. This worked out well. But the whole event cost us hundreds of pounds. This year, I’m trying to convince him that the dinosaur-themed park down the road offers just as much fun—and you don’t even need to wear special socks! This will be cheaper, because we aren’t required to hire a space—we can simply buy tickets for his mates.

But I still keep pondering over one thing—party bags. Why should a bunch of seven-year-olds, who have already been treated to a day out and a mountain of sugar, also be handed a bag full of pound-shop gifts for simply bothering to show up?

Party bags are an environmental disaster. I reckon my son attends 20 parties per year, and at each party there are 20 kids in attendance, which means 400 plastic bags in total. Within these 400 bags are perhaps 800 plastic toys, almost all of which fall apart on the journey home and then get binned instantly. The waste is shocking, and I don’t want to be part of it.

I know there are some party bag alternatives: one couple I know covered a table with Mr. Men books and got the kids to choose one each. At another party, I saw the hosts fill a bucket with soft toys and crumpled newspaper, and do a lucky dip (抽奖). Admirable efforts.

Even if that is a nice try, and even if the contents in the party bags don’t fall apart, so what? Will our guests think more highly of our child because of the party bags from our party? Will my child’s ability to make and keep friends be improved?

Well, the tradition for kid’s party bags ends with me, and it ends here, and it ends now. Who’s with me?