1 . The recent criticisms of Taylor Swift for her silence on the war in Gaza highlight a strange issue: the unrealistic expectations we place on celebrities to be know-alls. It’s a topic worth looking into.
While many are quick to urge figures like Taylor Swift to make their voices. to global issues, a concerning pattern emerges on the flip side: celebrities navigating the dark waters of complex issues with limited knowledge. Take, for instance, Billie Eilish’s fashion choice at the Oscars — a red hand pin. This wasn’t just any accessory (配饰); it’s rooted in the upset history of the cruel treatment of two Israelis. It raises the question: Was Eilish aware of the weighty story this symbol carries? This moment serves as a reminder of the nuance (微妙的) balance celebrities must strike between being supportive and the profound responsibility of using a public platform.
The celebrity culture in the United States, where public figures are promoted to almost god-like status, plays a significant role in such behavior. They are seen as perfect, their opinions holy. When we prioritize a celebrity’s opinion over those with professional knowledge, we do severe damage to the complexity of these issues.
As a society, we must reevaluate our extreme pursuit of celebrity culture and recognize the limitations of depending on entertainers for guidance on complex issues. This doesn’t mean celebrities can’t or shouldn’t speak out on matters. It’s entirely sensible for Taylor Swift to publicly support political candidates in her home country. The action originates from personal values, which are different from commenting on international conflicts without a deep understanding of the nuances involved.
In advocating for this sensible approach, we’re not suggesting celebrities should remain silent on all matters of public concern. Instead, we’re calling for a transformation in how we, as the public, understand and react to their involvement in social and political issues.
Ultimately, the goal should be to create a more sympathetic, informed society that values extensive knowledge and genuine activism over celebrity support. By encouraging public figures to use their platforms responsibly and directing our attention to where they can make a real difference, we take a step toward a more insightful understanding of global issues.
1. Why is “a red hand pin” mentioned in paragraph 2?| A．To make fun of Billie’s limited knowledge on debating. |
| B．To demonstrate Billie’s unawareness of irresponsible recommendation. |
| C．To sing high praises for Billie’s good taste for fashion at the Oscars. |
| D．To criticize Billie for her misapplication of the public platform. |
| A．Billie’s unreasonable selection of a red hand pin at the Oscars. |
| B．Celebrities’ irresponsible opinions on critical global conversations. |
| C．Public’s great desire for celebrities to comment on key global issues. |
| D．Taylor Swift’s golden silence about the crucial international concern. |
| A．Experts tend to increase the complexity of the issues. |
| B．Celebrities’ voices are as important as those of experts. |
| C．Celebrities should voice views on matters at home and abroad. |
| D．We should reassess the social and political roles of celebrities. |
| A．Expect the Unexpected | B．Public Platforms, Powerful Places. |
| C．The Drawback of Celebrity Recommendation | D．The Nature of Celebrity Responsibility |
2 . Search “toxic parents”, and you’ll find more than 38, 000 posts, largely urging young adults to cut ties with their families. The idea is to safeguard one’s mental health from offensive parents. However, as a psychoanalyst (精神分析学家), I’ve seen that trend in recent years become a way to manage conflicts in the family, and I have seen the severe impacts estrangement (疏远) has on both sides of the divide. This is a self-help trend that creates much harm.
“Canceling” your parent can be seen as an extension of a cultural trend aimed at correcting imbalances in power and systemic inequality. Today’s social justice values respond to this reality, calling on us to criticize oppressive and harmful figures and to gain power for those who have been powerless. But when adult children use the most effective tool they have—themselves—to gain a sense of security and ban their parents from their lives, the roles are simply switched, and the pain only deepens.
Often, what I see in my practice are cases of family conflict mismanaged, power dynamics turned upside down rather than negotiated. I see the terrible effect of that trend: situations with no winners, only isolated humans who long to be known and feel safe in the presence of the other.
The catch is that after estrangement, adult children are not suddenly less dependent. In fact, they feel abandoned and betrayed, because in the unconscious, it doesn’t matter who is doing the leaving; the feeling that remains is “being left”. They carry the ghosts of their childhood, tackling the emotional reality that those who raised us can never truly be left behind, no matter how hard we try.
What I have found is that most of these families need repair, not permanent break-up. How can one learn how to negotiate needs, to create boundaries and to trust? How can we love others, and ourselves, if not through accepting the limitations that come with being human? Good relationships are not the result of a perfect level of harmony but rather of successful adjustments.
To pursue dialogue instead of estrangement will be hard and painful work. It can’t be a single project of “self-help”, because at the end of the day, real intimacy (亲密关系) is achieved by working through the injuries of the past together. In most cases of family conflict, repair is possible and preferable to estrangement—and it’s worth the work.
1. Why do young people cut ties with the family?| A．To gain an independent life. | B．To follow a tendency towards social justice. |
| C．To restore harmony in the family. | D．To protect their psychological well-being. |
| A．Response. | B．Problem. | C．Bond. | D．Division. |
| A．Break down boundaries. | B．Accept imperfection of family members. |
| C．Live up to their parents’ expectations. | D．Repair a family item that has broken up. |
| A．To advocate a self-help trend. | B．To justify a common social value. |
| C．To argue against a current practice. | D．To discuss a means of communication. |
3 . Virtual reality is quickly becoming the new technological frontier. Tech companies everywhere seem to be racing to get their foot in the VR door. However, virtual reality has a set of challenges and hurdles that it must overcome in order to work well. It should be noted that VR is heavily dependent on being very fast, very accurate and very good-looking. If it isn’t, the viewer will feel motion sick or disconnected from the world that VR is trying to create.
Now that we can actually build VR headsets that begin to meet these requirements, we are seeing a rising interest in VR. As it rises, so does the interest in creating new media to be experienced in using virtual reality. Journalism is a medium built on relevance. Journalists should always be finding new ways to tell stories and deliver content. It is a goldmine for storytelling. What better ways to tell a story to someone than to put them right in the center of it?
Virtual reality is a powerful tool for journalists. The consumer isn’t just reading or watching something play out; they’re experiencing it. The immersive nature of VR allows for people to connect with the subject matter on a much deeper level than just reading about it. The experience is emotional, speaking more to our instinct than our intellect. The possibilities for storytelling here are legion, and any storyteller wanting to do something more interesting than their peers should surely be considering the sheer power of VR.
The question of virtual reality, though, is not how powerful it is. That is immediately apparent. The question of VR is one of viability and availability. Telling stories must be easy to do, and access to those stories must be readily available. This is the biggest challenge that VR faces. If the tools to tell a story with VR aren’t easy to pick up and learn, VR will fail. If VR technology isn’t both top-of-the-line and affordable, VR will fail.
Accessibility was one concern for Thomas Hallaq, assistant professor of journalism and mass communications, who said that current VR technology, is pretty exclusive right now. Despite that, he said he doesn’t think the exclusivity of this technology will be a problem in the long run.
“I think it’s very promising,” Hallaq said. “We’re seeing more technology become accessible, and more people having access to that technology. Just look at smartphones.” Like radio, TV and the Internet before it, virtual reality will change the way we tell stories.
1. Why is VR considered a powerful tool for journalism?| A．Because it is an exclusively new tool. |
| B．Because it is very powerful and popular. |
| C．Because people can experience the story in person. |
| D．Because it is very fast, accurate and good-looking. |
| A．How powerful and interesting it can be. |
| B．Whether people will have easy access to it. |
| C．Whether qualified VR headsets can be built. |
| D．What new ways people will find to deliver content. |
| A．Optimistic. | B．Neutral. | C．Pessimistic. | D．Concerned. |
| A．The Wide Popularity of Virtual Reality |
| B．The Future Development of Virtual Reality |
| C．Challenges and Hurdles of Virtual Reality |
| D．Virtual Reality is the Future of Storytelling |
Something odd is happening to the tired millennial (千禧年的) workers of America. After a year spent with their computers at home, they are turning over the carefully arranged chessboards of their lives and determining to take a risk. Some are giving jobs up to launch a new business, while others are stepping off the boring work totally. Their bank accounts (账户), fattened by a year’s stay-at-home saving, have increased their desire for risk.
If this movement has a battle cry, it is “YOLO” — “you only live once”. Stock (股票) traders use it when making irresponsible bets that sometimes pay off anyway. More broadly, it has come to refer to the attitude that has described a certain type of bored office worker in recent months.
“I didn’t feel like I knew how to do my job anyway,” said Ms. Messer, 28. So she announced her quitting. Since then, she has been writing and keeping time for hobbies like painting and skiing. She admitted that not all people could uproot themselves so easily. “I have this renewed creative sense about what my life could look like, and how satisfying it can be” she said.
“It feels like we have been so locked into careers for the past few years, and this is our opportunity to switch it up”, said Nate Moseley, 29, a buyer at a major clothing store. Mr Moseley recently decided to leave his $ 130,000-a-year job. He created an Excel file called “Late 20s Crisis(危机)”, which he filled with possible choices for his next move: join in a 2023 political campaign, move to Caribbean and open a tourism business. “The idea of going right back to the pre-COVID set-up sounds so unappealing after this past year,” he noted. “If not, when will I ever do this?”
Not everyone can afford to put carefulness behind them. But for a growing number of people with enough savings and practical skills, the fear and the anxiety of the past year are giving way to a new kind of professional fearlessness. COVID-19 changed their priorities, and they realized they didn’t have to live like this. Adventure is in the air.
1. What strange things are American millennial workers doing?| A．They are tending to work online. | B．They are taking more risks in work. |
| C．They are more willing to save money. | D．They are developing more hobbies than before. |
| A．To describe some boring work. |
| B．To advise people to treasure time. |
| C．To persuade people to be careful about decisions. |
| D．To inspire people to take brave moves. |
| A．His new plans for life. | B．His achievements for work. |
| C．His opinions on political events. | D．His memory of pre-COVID life. |
| A．How does COVID-19 affect Millennials’ career choices? |
| B．What is the YOLO Economy (经济)? |
| C．Why do Millennials tend to save rather than spend? |
| D．Who is responsible for the sudden adventure? |
5 . Lithium (锂) is called “white gold” for good reason. The metal’s value has been growing sharply over the last several years, in a large part because it is an essential part of batteries as well as several key sustainable technologies where energy storage is of huge significance. As electric cars, wind and solar power have grown into major players in the energy industry, lithium has become key to engineering a future free of fossil (化石) fuels.
But acquiring lithium comes at an enormous cost. It often works like this: Water containing lithium is delivered to the surface from underground and mixed with fresh water. The mixture then sits in pools to get rid of water, leaving the rest of its contents behind as brightly colored “mud”. Then heat and chemical reactions are used to get lithium from that, changing it into powder which is then packaged and shipped to buyers around the world.
Any accident that releases mine contents into surrounding communities or the groundwater supply could have unimaginable long-term impacts. To be specific, indigenous (土著的) communities often bear the damage, and political leaders have typically given little weight to their concerns. In Arizona, for example, an expanding lithium mine is threatening the Hualapai Tribe’s cultural and historic sites. Recently, mining lithium and other precious metals has brought about conflict: How do you ensure the availability of materials essential to the future of renewables while protecting those communities’ rights?
Mining of the metal is expected to increase dramatically in coming years. Over time, experts say, that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions (排放) by making electric cars more affordable and, therefore, more popular. As environmentally conscious consumers buy electric cars in ever-greater numbers, it’s important to be aware of the dirty process that powers those clean air vehicles.
1. What does the author’s intention of writing Paragraph 1?| A．To introduce the background of an event. | B．To explain a complex industrial theory. |
| C．To describe a noticeable recent tendency. | D．To predict the future of a main technology. |
| A．Unexpected material leak. | B．Violent chemical reactions. |
| C．Wrong political decisions. | D．Lithium mine expansion. |
| A．Intolerant. | B．Uncaring. | C．Favorable. | D．Objective. |
| A．High Expense of Lithium Mining | B．Potential Benefit of Using Lithium |
| C．Hidden Threat behind Clean Energy | D．Bright Future of Renewable Resources |
6 . In December 1994, a weight-loss movement was started, stating that obesity(肥胖) had become America’s second-largest cause of death, “resulting in about 300, 000 lives lost each year.” This marked the beginning of a long and influential life for the number. Experts began using the number to stress the seriousness of the problem. After ten years, the number had ballooned to nearly 400, 000 deaths caused by high weight, and it was expected to soon reach half a million. But these seemingly shocking numbers were then overturned(推翻) The number killer was Katherine Flegal.
Hoping to better understand the relationship between body size and death rate, Flegal led a study that finally showed something many scientists—and certainly the public—did not expect:the annual(每年的) deaths related to obesity added up to just more than 100, 000. More interesting still, people considered “overweight” could live longer than those who had “normal” weight. The study was met with a firestorm of doubt. “People were saying that our article was rubbish,” Flegal says. “Our findings produced controversy(争论) because someone wanted a controversy.”
“People are just more comfortable with a larger number—they prefer it to be larger,” Flegal says. And in nutrition science and medicine, that larger number is equal to the idea that thinner is better, skinnier is healthier. “You can report the same findings about obesity 100 times, and it can be called ‘unexpected’ every single time,” Flegal says. “At what point would you change your mind and say this might be the expected?”
“It’s human nature for people to find proof that supports their belief,” Caan, a breast cancer researcher says. “But we need to study where the data takes us.” Her own “unexpected findings” led to a discovery that could influence breast cancer patients:keeping muscle during treatment is far more important to survival than avoiding weight gain. “We can’t be stuck in what we thought was true,” Caan says, “because then we’re never going to move the field forward.”
1. In paragraph 1, the author lists numbers to ______.| A．call on people to lose weight | B．draw experts’ attention to obesity |
| C．support the weight-loss movement | D．introduce Flegal’s research background |
| A．It helped people to live a longer life. |
| B．It lacked proof so that it caused doubt. |
| C．Its aim was to decide on normal weight ranges. |
| D．Its findings were beyond people’s expectations. |
| A．A point that changes our mind. |
| B．A study about nutrition science. |
| C．The large number of deaths caused by obesity. |
| D．The idea that thinner is better, skinnier is healthier |
| A．Breast cancer is related to body size. |
| B．It is necessary to break limiting beliefs. |
| C．Losing weight matters to cancer patients. |
| D．It is right to believe what we choose to believe. |
7 . In colleges around the country, most students are also workers.
The reality of college can be pretty different from the
This isn’t a(n)
But it’s not all upside. Even full-time work may not completely
| A．memories | B．ideas | C．descriptions | D．images |
| A．accurate | B．pressing | C．consistent | D．limiting |
| A．agenda | B．dream | C．jobs | D．chances |
| A．temporary | B．dynamic | C．academic | D．alternative |
| A．ambition | B．arrangement | C．distribution | D．payment |
| A．beyond | B．from | C．beside | D．for |
| A．urgent | B．demanding | C．critical | D．convincing |
| A．land | B．quit | C．offer | D．handle |
| A．looking into | B．applying for | C．looking for | D．applying to |
| A．follow | B．switch | C．decide | D．ensure |
| A．approve | B．serve | C．investigate | D．cover |
| A．devoting | B．sacrificing | C．experiencing | D．allowing |
| A．debt | B．traps | C．tax | D．hurdles |
| A．available | B．resistant | C．identified | D．withdrawn |
| A．put off | B．rely on | C．end up | D．absent from |
8 . It might have been Jimmy Kimmel, or any other sharp-tongued talk show hosts of late-night TV. In this instance, it was Samantha Bee, stating her opposition to childhood vaccinations (打疫苗) humorously. “Who are you going to believe?” she asked. “Leading authorities on medical science, or 800 comments on your cousin’s Facebook page?”
Joking about science can have serous effects, according to studies by communication scholars. Accordingly, since 2013, Paul, a psychological professor, has conducted studies of how satire (讥讽) can influence people’s beliefs about science, which have shown that if you want to interest people in science and shape their views on hot-button science issues, satirical humor can work better.
Many Americans pay little attention to science. Even people who regularly watch TV news receive only a little science information in their media dict, because mainstream media outlets devote so little airtime to the subject. On top of that, some Americans may regard science as inaccessible.
Yet satirical humor can reach viewers who would never watch NOVA or read一well, National Geographic. Millions of people watch late-night television programs live, and videos of these shows get millions of views on streaming services. In 2016, a vote conducted by the University of Delaware Center indicated that nearly one in 10 said they learned about science from late-night television shows.
Late-night hosts may occasionally joke about scientists. More often, however, the hosts promote a positive image of science. By making science entertaining to audience with little knowledge of the topic, late-night television could fire science engagement. Furthermore, the researchers concluded that satirical shows had the biggest impact among the least educated viewers, thus helping to narrow a gap in attention to science. Though late-night satirical humor can boost science interest and awareness, it has its limits. Science is complex, and conveying that complexity in a few minutes while telling jokes can be a challenge.
1. What does Paul’s studies of joking about science indicate?| A．It can effectively popularize science. |
| B．It may do serious damage to science. |
| C．It totally changes people’s attitude to science. |
| D．It will shift people’s attention from entertainment to science. |
| A．Because they find no interest in science issues. |
| B．Because they enjoy watching entertainments. |
| C．Because science is not easy to come up with. |
| D．Because science is seldom seen on mainstream media. |
| A．Education gap can be bridged through late-night shows. |
| B．The hosts get used to playing tricks on scientists. |
| C．Science participation can be promoted among their viewers. |
| D．The hosts’ aim is to build a positive image of science. |
| A．Critical. | B．Objective. | C．Positive. | D．Negative. |
9 . Humans’ overconsumption of resources is a leading contributor to global climate change, says University of Arizona researcher Sabrina Helm. Therefore, it’s increasingly important to understand the choices consumers make and how those decisions affect the health of a planet with limited resources. In a new study, published in the journal Young Consumers, Helm and her colleagues explore how materialistic values influence pro-environmental behaviors in millennials, who are now the nation’s most influential group of consumers.
The researchers focused on two main categories of pro-environmental behaviors: reduced consumption, which includes actions like repairing instead of replacing older items; and “green buying,” or purchasing products designed to limit environmental impacts. The researchers also looked at how engaging in pro-environmental behaviors affects consumer well-being.
More materialistic participants, the researchers found, were unlikely to engage in reduced consumption. However, materialism did not seem to have an effect on their likelihood of practicing “green buying.” That’s probably because “green buying,” unlike reduced consumption, still offers a way for materialists to fulfill their desire to get new items, Helm said.
Study participants who reported having fewer materialistic values were much more likely to engage in reduced consumption. Consuming less was, in turn, linked to higher personal well-being and lower psychological suffering. Green buying—which may have some positive environmental effects, although to a smaller degree than reduced consumption—was not found to improve consumer well-being, Helm said.
The take-home message for consumers: “The key is to reduce consumption and not just buy green stuff. Having less and buying less can actually make us more satisfied and happier,” Helm said. “If you have a lot of stuff, you have a lot on your mind,” she said. “For example, it requires maintenance and there’s a lot of burdens of ownership, and if you relieve yourself of that burden of ownership, most people report feeling a lot better and freer.”
Helm and her colleagues additionally looked at how materialism affects millennial consumers’ proactive financial behaviors, such as budgeting and saving. Examining financial behaviors alongside pro-environmental behaviors provides a picture of how young adults proactively deal with resource limitations in two contexts: environmental and financial, Helm said.
As expected, Helm and her colleagues found that those who reported having more materialistic values engaged in fewer proactive financial behaviors than their less materialistic counterparts (对应的人). The researchers also found that, consistent with previous studies, proactive financial behaviors were associated with better personal well-being, life satisfaction and financial satisfaction, as well as lower psychological suffering.
Understanding how materialistic values impact consumer behaviors, and how those behaviors in turn affect personal and environmental well-being, is important, Helm said. However, she acknowledges that for many consumers, shifting behaviors to be more financially proactive and consume less will be challenging.
1. What do we know about pro-environmental behaviors?| A．They are a cause of climate change. |
| B．They lead to a more satisfying life. |
| C．They vary in different age groups. |
| D．They are affected by materialism. |
| A．ownership of green products brings a sense of happiness |
| B．materialists prefer practicing green buying to buying less |
| C．green buying helps control people’s desire to buy new items |
| D．buying less and green buying have similar effects on people |
| A．Replacing older items. | B．Developing new resources. |
| C．Buying greener products. | D．Being careful with expenses. |
| A．When people develop proactive financial behaviors. |
| B．Which financial behaviors lead to mental well-being. |
| C．Why it is hard to change people’s financial behaviors. |
| D．How materialistic values influence financial behaviors. |
10 . “Do not tell anyone”. We often hear these words when someone tells us a secret. But keeping a secret is hard. We’re often tempted（引诱）to “spill the beans”, even if we regret it later.
According to the professor, Asim Shah, keeping a secret may well “become a burden”. This is because people often have an “eager and anxious urge（冲动）to share it with someone”. An earlier study, led by Anita, a scientist at the University of Notre Dame, US, suggested that keeping a secret could cause stress. People entrusted（托付）with secrets can suffer from depression, anxiety, and body aches, reported the Daily Mail.
Secrets are so often getting out. Why do people share them at all? Shah explained that people often feel that it will help them keep a person as a friend. Another reason people share secrets is guilt over keeping it from someone close to them. A sense of distrust can develop when people who are close do not share it with each other. “Keeping or sharing secrets often puts people in a position of either gaining or losing the trust of someone, ”according to Shah.
He added that talkative people could let secrets slip out. But this doesn’t mean that it is a good idea only to share secrets with quiet people. A quiet person may be someone who keeps everything inside. To tell such a person a secret may cause them stress, and make them talk about the secret.
Shah said that to judge whether to tell someone a secret, you’d better put yourself in their position, Think about how you would feel to be told that you mustn’t give the information away. Shah also recommended that if you accidentally give up someone’s secret you should come clean about it. Let the person know that their secret isn’t so secret anymore.
1. Why does the author say keeping a secret may “become a burden”?| A．Because people are born not to be able to keep secrets. |
| B．Because when people have secrets, their bodies ache. |
| C．Because keeping secrets is certain to cause depression. |
| D．Because keeping secrets could probably be harmful to health. |
| A．2. | B．3. | C．4. | D．5. |
| A．To fall by accident. | B．To let out secrets on purpose. |
| C．To spread secrets to everyone around. | D．To give away secrets unintentionally. |
| A．Quiet people are more likely to keep the secrets to themselves. |
| B．Sharing secrets helps establish friendship or get over the, sense of guilt. |
| C．Putting yourself in others’ shoes helps realize the importance of keeping secrets. |
| D．A person who is asked to keep a secret will suffer from psychological problems only. |
