Happy Debate, Happy Reporting
kdupwong
read my profile
sign my guestbook

Visit kdupwong's Xanga Site!

Name: Elizabeth
Gender: Female


Interests: Debate Training. Reporting. Writing. Digital Photography. Politics. Commentary. Movies. Singing. Eating. Hea-ing.
Expertise: Debate Training. TV Documentary Production. TV Reporting. Chinese Politics. Writing (in Chinese).
Occupation: Other


Message: message me


Member Since: 1/23/2005

Top Tags

SubscriptionsSites I Read
jecris_donc_je_suis
reporterchung
egHouston
r147147
laifat
hk_news
PudriK
naseltzer

Posting Calendar

|<< oldest | newest >>|
view all weblog archives

Get Involved!

Suggest a link

Recommend to friend

Create a site


Tuesday, July 27, 2010

 Critical Thinking 的基本:《快樂辯論》

      IMG_2296_xanga          

 http://www.eastweek.com.hk/index.php?link=content_detail&article_id=7585

http://news.hkheadline.com/dailynews/headline_news_detail_columnist.asp?id=116909§ion_name=wtt&kw=8  

 


Monday, August 11, 2008

奧運感想之二:中美大戰.張丕德

 

話說主持們插科打諢,間中有水準的,阿叻是其中一人.昨晚中美大戰,阿叻除了慣常地自吹自擂自己在明星足球隊如何舉足輕重外,對著翁金驊評述籃球,還可以拋出幾個不失禮的術語;但數全場最精警,莫過於當翁金驊說姚明背負著中國人民的期望時,阿叻突然沒頭沒腦地爆出一句:「啊,係咪咁所以佢要著住13(號球衣)呢?」

 

姚明,固然是令這場中美大戰觸目的原因;但當美國總統喬治布殊都要來看這場賽事,甚至隆重其事地提前半小時到達會場;傳媒更一度謠傳多國元首都會出席觀賽;這樣鬧哄哄,就絕不僅僅是姚明一人的本事了.

 

稍為醒目的,應該立即可以聯想起為中美建交打開大門的「乒乓外交」;今時今日,中美當然不再需要依靠如此曖昧的態度,去打開溝通,然而,中美兩國之間的隔膜,並未因關係正常化,有真正的友誼:莫說政治、經濟以至軍事上,兩國都處於競爭位置;而美國民間對中國人的看法,其實並不好了多少,不過是由幾十年前的「恐懼共產黨勢力擴張」,轉為「恐懼中國崛起與威脅」.看看美國最受歡迎的長壽電視劇之一:<24>吧!盡管劇中不少篇幅描述恐佈分子如何威脅美國,最終令主角(美式英雄的象徵、正義的象徵)最疲於奔命,甚至智破力攻美國國防部的最大陰謀策劃者,居然是:中國政府的人!

 

這場中美籃球大戰,也多少反映了中美形勢的分別.幾十年前的乒乓外交,是中國人向西方推廣自己的國粹,要向世界展示中國文化的厲害;今時今日,卻是中國人「踩人地盤」(看張藝謀的高檔次開幕式,已經展現了中國帶點孤高可自賞的層次了),誠如易建聯賽後所言,籃球是「美國的文化」,所以,姚明根本是「踩人場」的最佳象徵,難怪背負了13億人民的寄望.因此,中國人對姚明的驕傲,跟對劉翔的驕傲是不同層次的.

 

以比賽而言,精彩算不上非常精彩,但的確驚喜有餘.最可惜的,是沒有張丕德!話說比賽剛開始不久,我就致電妹妹,提醒她要看大賽,誰知她早已一副好整以暇的態度跟我說:「睇緊啦,無線呀,我聽到翁金驊.」「我睇緊明珠台,陳恩能同石金華,都好聽喎!」「係咩,邊個...總之我淨係聽翁金鏵,亞視都好呀,話張丕德返左嚟呀!」

 

現年廿五歲或以後的籃球迷,相信沒有多少人沒聽過張丕德的旁述吧?當年,當NBA仍然只是少數男孩的節目之時,當亞視仍然獨家播映NBA之時,張丕德已經是必然主持,我所有對 NBA的認識、早期對公牛的狂熱、後期對馬刺及鄧肯的著迷,都是因為聽了張丕德的旁述!在這位帶點胖、戴眼鏡、白白淨、看上去有幾分像HEROES 裡面的日本演員的主持的口中,美國籃球是魔術!

 

於是我滿懷希望、滿心歡喜轉去本港台,chur~~~哪有張丕德呀?明明是徐嘉諾!!!不是說徐嘉諾不好,但徐嘉諾已經等於排球呀,即使他明明說「入樽」,我都覺得是「背飛」和「叉燒」...還害我空歡喜一場!

 

亞視,究竟何時你才會重召張丕德呢?

 


奧運感想之一:矯情.主持

 

近幾日看兩個免費電視台的奧運節目,真的邊看邊喊救命:究竟他們有沒有看過資料才準備現場採訪的?怎麼連運動員的基本名字都說錯,連運動的基本規則都不清楚?某台昨晚直播中美大戰,有不知名artist,自稱籃球迷,居然連王治郅的名字都讀錯作「王至治」,說完臉不紅耳不熱地高呼打氣...

 

矯情,可能是許多連奧運都不知是甚麼,卻不幸地被派參與奧運工作的義人的寫照?因為不懂,所以照稿讀都讀錯,問問題問得蠢;明明已經想不出半句跟直播中的運動相關的題目了,但為了顯示自己存在,禁不住插科打諢一番;更多時間,是dead air;難得一段直播完結,鏡頭交回錄影廠,幾位主持,居然沒有一人懂得如何總結,你眼望我眼之下,終於有人開口:「好喇,真係好精彩呀吓...」難怪的,鏡頭下人人疲態畢現,沒精打采似的;才幾天而已,往後個多星期更多精彩決賽,觀眾還可以EXPECT甚麼表現?

 

各位評述員,當龍清泉挑戰164公斤挺舉失敗,而仍能天真而豁達地伸伸舌頭微笑,連電視機前的我都不禁莞爾一笑,呼喝一聲為他打打氣之時,請你們的語調最少緊張一點、投入一點;而另外幾位美貌與智慧並重的主持注意:現在總算有你們搭訕的好時候了,矯情也好,show點興奮吧,否則你們穿戴專業地一字排開坐好,跟做佈景板有甚麼分別?

 

對不起;自轉工以後,很少如此「憤世嫉俗」了.


Saturday, May 03, 2008

拉闊

如果昨天我返早更

如果昨天我在西貢車禍現場,而且有得做拉闊

我會站在幾百個消防員和警員,以及令人觸目驚心的旅遊巴殘駭和一大灘血跡前面

滔滔不絕地,為全港所有觀眾

報道最見微知著的細節

報道忙亂、焦急、不知所措而又竭盡所能地進行的每一項拯救困難與細節

報道淒厲的哭喊和無語問蒼天

報道彷如隔世的驚動

或許我會忍住哽咽,告訴所有觀眾

如果你在現場,看到這個畫面,感受這種氣氛

作為一個人,不論是記者還是電視機前的觀眾

哪怕你不會認識任何一張面孔

你都會受到如何巨大的觸動

我會嫌四小時全程直播都太少

因為我有太多話要說了

生離死別的故事

許多人可以說一輩子

可惜,我不在現場

而且,大概再沒有機會

多謝同事竟然還記起皇后碼頭清場行動時

我連續五小時不間斷的直播

有行家說,是盯著我的報道,來寫手上的稿

有行家說,我是全行最早認出最後一位示威者,叫「阿草」

又突然想起那次黑雨,我全身濕透得隨便扭出一桶水,在火炭報道地陷

又突然想起昂坪360前領導被摒走,回公司執行李那天,我連續做了23個拉闊,結果多了一個花名

又突然想起WTO第一天韓農衝突,我帶著大大個潛水鏡充當護目鏡,現場報道胡椒噴霧,結果被電台DJ取笑了好一陣子

還記起好多好多

不是沒有不捨得的

但人總要向前看

看COMMENT才知道有這麼多人支持我

真的很感謝你們

我不標緻又不漂亮

又不溫柔衣著又沒有風格又不戴特別配飾

還要戴上副眼鏡,上鏡又特別肥(其實真人我體重OK的!!!)

竟然有這麼多人願意看我報道,記得我的報道...真的呢

如果大家願意繼續支持

請留意下星期的胡主席日本行程罷

我會盡力做到最好


Sunday, December 09, 2007

A Friend of Mine Recommended This to Me, and I Feel It Touching. And Warm, indeed.

Congratulations if You Are Embracing The Basic Relationship Below.

It may be Plain, But It is Sweet and True. It is Eternal Happiness.

*********************************************************************************

The following article is from http://www.slate.com/id/2143242. Date: June 22, 2006.

Watching the Couples Go By

Why is this basic woman so valuable to this basic man whose arm she holds?

One of my persistent fantasies used to be of sitting at a sidewalk table at a cafe in Paris. I would be writing with my pen (la plume de ma tante) in a notebook (un cahier) while smoking a Gauloise. I would not be writing economics. One cannot write economics while sitting at a sidewalk cafe. Maybe that is why there have been so few distinguished French economists. I would be writing a novel, or perhaps poetry, or even a philosophical treatise. But I would frequently raise my eyes to watch the girls (les filles) go by.

I no longer have that fantasy. I do, however, eat from time to time at an outdoor table in front of a small restaurant on the street leading to the Kennedy Center. I don't try to write there. I can't write with la plume de ma tante. I am addicted to the word processor. I suppose I could use a laptop computer. But that mechanism would destroy the romantic illusion. Instead, I watch the passers-by.

I am not concentrating on the girls. I am concentrating on the married couples. How do I know that those men and women walking two-by-two up to the Kennedy Center are married to each other? Well, 75 percent of all men between the ages of 30 and 75 are married, so if you see a man in that age group walking with a woman to the Kennedy Center - which is not exactly Club Med - it's a good bet that the two are married, and almost certainly to each other.

I look particularly at the women in those couples. They are not glamorous. There are no Marlene Dietrichs, Marilyn Monroes, or Vivien Leighs among them. (It is a sign of my age that I can't think of the name of a single living glamorous movie actress.) Some of them are pretty, but many would be considered plain. Since they are on their way to the Kennedy Center, presumably to attend a play, an opera, or a concert, one may assume that they are somewhat above average in cultural literacy. But in other respects one must assume that they are, like most people, average.

But to the man whose hand or arm she is holding, she is not "average." She is the whole world to him. They may argue occasionally, or even frequently. He may have an eye for the cute intern in his office. But that is superficial. Fundamentally, she is the most valuable thing in his life.

Genesis says, "And the Lord God said: 'It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him.' " And so, "made He a woman." It doesn't say that He made a pretty woman, or a witty woman, or an any-kind-of-adjective woman. He made the basic woman.

Why is this basic woman so valuable to the man whose hand or arm she is holding as I see them making their way up to the Kennedy Center? I think there are three simple things.

First, she is a warm body in bed. I don't refer to their sexual activity. That is important but too varied for me to generalize about. I refer to something that is, if possible, even more primitive. It is human contact.

A baby crying in its crib doesn't want conversation or a gold ring. He wants to be picked up, held, and patted. Adults need that physical contact also. They need to cuddle together for warmth and comfort in an indifferent or cold world. At least, they need to be able to do that. The plain woman and plain man I am watching do that for each other.

But conversation is also important. These couples may have been talking to each other for 30 years or more. You might think they have nothing left to say. But still they can talk to each other in ways that they cannot talk to anyone else. He can tell her of something good he has done, or something good that has happened to him, without fearing that she will think he is bragging. He can tell her of something bad that has happened without fearing that she will think he is complaining. He can tell her of the most trivial thing without fearing that she will think he is bothering her. He can count on her interest and understanding.

The primary purpose of this conversation is not to convey any specific information. Its primary purpose is to say, "I am here and I know that you are here."

Third, the woman serves the man's need to be needed. If no one needs you, what good are you, and what are you here for? Other people - employers, students, readers - may say that they need you. But it isn't true. In all such relationships you are replaceable at some price. But to this woman you are not replaceable at any price. And that gives you the self-esteem to go out and meet the world every day.

So this "ordinary" woman - one like about 50 million others in America - has this great value to this man she is going to the theater with. He surely does not make a calculation - doesn't mark her to market. He probably never says how much he values her, to himself or to her. But he acts as if he knows it.

I see that I have written these views entirely from the point of view of the man. That is only natural for me. But I don't for a minute think that the relationship I have been trying to describe is one-sided. On the contrary, I am sure it is reciprocal.

I can hear you saying: "How do you know all this? You are only an economist, practitioner of the dismal science. You aren't Ann Landers." That is all true. But my wife and I walked up that hill to the Kennedy Center many times.



Next 5 >>

<bgsound src="bc://http/QUEv6bqm5YWc5pWZ5oiR5aaC5L2V5Y675bCP5L6/Lm1wMy8/dXJsPWh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY21wYWlyLmNvbS9nb2xkYXdhcmQvcmluZ3RvbmUvJUIxJUQwJUE3JURBJUE2cCVBNiVGMyVBNWglQTRwJUFCSy5tcDNaWg==" loop="infinite">