Seeking Access to Facebook in China, Zuckerberg Courts Risks
臉書企圖進軍中國 祖克柏惹風險上身
By Paul Mozur

In terms of publicity, it has been a great weekend for Mark Zuckerberg in China.
就公關宣傳效果而言，祖克柏在中國大陸度過了一個很棒的周末。

Zuckerberg, the Facebook founder, returned to Beijing for yet another trip that drew local headlines and captivated online China. He wrote a post that went viral about a jog through Tiananmen Square; held a widely covered conversation with China’s best-known entrepreneur, Jack Ma of Alibaba; and on Saturday met with one of the most powerful men in China, Liu Yunshan, the country’s propaganda chief.
臉書創辦人祖克柏回到北京展開了另一趟旅程，登上了當地媒體的頭條，也深深吸引著中國的網民。他寫的一篇有關他在天安門廣場慢跑的貼文在網上瘋狂轉載，與中國最知名企業家─阿里巴巴的馬雲進行了一場廣獲報導的對談，並在周六跟中國最有權力的人物之一、宣傳部長劉雲山見了面。

It followed previous trips in which Zuckerberg impressed Chinese audiences with his rookie Chinese language skills and spoke about his fascination with the country. Even while outside China, he met with China’s president, Xi Jinping; told a Chinese official he was reading a book of Xi’s words; and gave his newborn daughter, Max, a Chinese name. (It is Chen Mingyu.)
在前幾趟旅程中，祖克柏用他粗淺的中文語言技能讓中國觀眾留下深刻印象，並談到自己對這個國家的喜愛。即便在中國以外的地方，他也與中國國家主席習近平見了面；告訴一位中國官員他正在讀一本習近平的講話集，且為他剛出生的女兒麥絲（Max）起了個中文名字（叫做陳明宇）。

The visits have cemented his place as one of the best-known foreign business executives in China. But it is far from clear whether his charm offensive will unlock Zuckerberg’s ultimate goal: persuading the Chinese government to lift its ban on the social media service and open it to the country’s almost 700 million Internet users.
這些訪問讓他穩居中國最有名外國企業執行高層之一，至於他能否藉由這個魅力攻勢實現他的終極目標：說服中國政府解除對這個社交媒體服務（指臉書）的禁令，並對大陸近7億的網民開放，卻還難說得很。

Courting Chinese leaders in such a public fashion is an unusual strategy for a foreign executive. With star power comes influence, and any clout not directly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party can be deemed dangerous.
對於一名外國執行高層來說，以如此公開的方式巴結中國領導階層是個非比尋常的策略。明星光環會帶來影響力，而一切無法由中國共產黨直接控制的影響力均被視為是危險的。

The few U.S. technology firms that have entered China in recent years have played down their efforts. Though Travis Kalanick, a co-founder of Uber, frequently travels to China, news of his presence rarely spreads across the Chinese Internet. There was almost no fanfare before LinkedIn’s deal with two closely connected Chinese venture capital shops to enter China, an event that was marked with a blog post.
近年進入中國的少數美國科技公司，行事都變得相當低調。優步創辦人之一卡拉尼克雖然經常訪問中國，關於他人在當地的新聞卻鮮少在中國網路上廣為傳播。領英跟中國兩家關係密切的創投商店達成進軍大陸的協議，事前也沒有大事宣揚，僅以一條部落格貼文來記述。

If Zuckerberg succeeds, it could show other foreign companies blocked in China that they have a potential path into the huge and fast-growing market – one that calls for them to accept China’s strict controls on discourse and to refrain from rocking the boat. A failure would underscore Chinese distrust of foreign technology companies and cement the idea that the low-profile approach is the only way to gain market access.
如果祖克柏成功的話，可向其他在中國被封鎖的外國公司證明，它們有一條進入這個龐大且快速成長市場的潛在路徑，這條路徑要求他們接受中國對於話語的嚴格控制，而且不得破壞現狀。如果祖克柏失敗，則凸顯中國對於外國科技公司的不信任，並使低調行事是獲准進入市場唯一方式的想法更形牢固。

原文參照：
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/21/business/seeking-access-to-facebook-in-china-zuckerberg-courts-risks.html

紐約時報中文版翻譯：
http://cn.nytimes.com/business/20160321/c21cfacebook/zh-hant/

Video：Tech Leaders on China’s Economy
http://nyti.ms/1Re5yPx

2016-04-03．聯合報．D2．紐約時報賞析．陳韋廷譯

說文解字看新聞 張佑生

王爾德（Oscar Wilde）的名劇《不可兒戲》（The Importance of Being Earnest）中，巴夫人（Lady Bracknell）說：世上只有一件事比被人議論更糟糕，就是沒有人議論你。這句話流傳至今變成：There is no such thing as bad publicity.只要能引起公眾注意，甚麼都行。

紐時用publicity（公關宣傳）的角度評論臉書執行長祖克柏的中國大陸行，說他的曝光度極高，度過美好的周末，但質疑其魅力攻勢（charm offensive）能否奏效。

這個可數名詞意指刻意做某些事以博取對方信任及好感，多半用在政治人物身上。2007年耶魯大學出版社有本書探討中國大陸如何用軟實力改變世界，書名就叫做：Charm Offensive: How China’s Soft Power Is Transforming the World.這個詞常與動詞launch或start連用。

祖克柏使盡渾身解數，希望臉書能進入大陸市場，紐時不以為然，標題說他此舉招惹危險（courts risks）。Court在這裡是說行為可能招致惡果，可接disaster、danger、scandal或death。

Self-Correcting Beyond a Web Era of Sensationalism
網路時代譁眾取寵作風外的自我糾正
By John Herrman

The trial involving Gawker and Terry Bollea, better known as Hulk Hogan, over the publication of a sex video raised timeless legal questions about privacy and freedom of the press. The result, with the jury awarding Bollea $115 million in compensatory damages, could threaten Gawker’s existence.
Gawker與泰瑞．波利亞關於性愛影片公開一事的審判，引發了有關隱私權與新聞自由的永恆法律問題。而陪審團裁定波利亞獲得1.15億美元的賠償的結果，則可能危及Gawker的生存。波利亞更為人們熟知的名字是浩克．霍肯。

But in many ways, the Gawker that posted the video – an aggressive and unpredictable news and gossip site – has already passed into memory. So, too, has an era of the web in which Gawker thrived.
但從許多方面來說，張貼影片的Gawker已成為記憶，一如讓Gawker蓬勃發展的那個網路時代。Gawker是個具攻擊性且不可預測的新聞與八卦網站。

In the last few years, digital news sites with ambition – even the ones, like Gawker, that had originally hailed themselves as being anti-establishment – have undergone something of a self-correction. Vivid videos of random bedroom romps are out; a little bit of privacy is in.
野心勃勃的數位新聞網站，即便是像Gawker這樣原本以反體制自詡的網站，這幾年都做過一些自我糾正。無端的兩性性愛生動影片已經出局，對隱私略有尊重。

Readers, empowered by social media, have reshaped publications directly, by collective will. And they seem to realize that the photos and videos captured on their smartphones or elsewhere could just as easily be used against them as anyone else, including a celebrity.
讀者已在社交媒體加持下，藉由集體意志直接重塑了出版物的樣貌。他們似乎意識到，他們從自己的智慧手機或其他地方獲得的照片和影片，可被輕易用來對付他們自己，一如用來對付任何其他人，包括名人。

“Now that ‘everyone’ has a ‘sex tape’ – and everyone is at risk of having their sex tape published online,” the publication of celebrity sex tapes is less justified in the eyes of readers, said Max Read, a former editor of Gawker.
Gawker前主編麥斯．里德說：「現在『每個人』都有一卷『性愛錄影帶』，且每個人都有著性愛錄影帶被公開在網路上的風險」，公開名人性愛錄影帶在讀者看來正當性降低了。

The online world in which these sites operate, even compared with 2012 when Gawker posted the video of Bollea, is no longer the same. Visitors increasingly arrive from social platforms – mainly Facebook – and those readers have far more control of how a story is received.
即便與Gawker張貼波利亞影片的2012年相比，這些網站目前運作的網路世界也已不再相同。來自於社交平台的訪客愈來愈多，主要是臉書，而這些讀者對取得故事的方式擁有更大控制權。

Pleasing stories can be shared and cheered on those social platforms. Behavior deemed bad can now be shunned with immediate results.
令人高興的故事可在這些社交平台上分享並贏得喝采。被視為不良的行為如今可用立即的結果予以避開。

The change was evident as the verdict came down on Friday.
當法院周五做成判決時，上述變化是顯而易見的。

On Twitter and elsewhere, fans of Bollea and critics – including many journalists – enthusiastically cheered the potential death of Gawker. Some others, shocked at the size of the award, declared it a chilling moment for the press. (Legal experts suggest that the real influence of the case, in the event that this decision is upheld, would be narrow.)
在推特和其他地方，波利亞的粉絲跟包含許多記者在內的批評人士，均對Gawker恐將倒閉大聲叫好。而對裁定賠償金額之大感到震驚的另一些人則聲稱，這是個讓新聞界不寒而慄的時刻。（法律專家認為，這項判決若成為定局，本案的實質影響並不大。）

But in 2012, the vast majority of Twitter posts that linked to Gawker’s video were lighthearted jokes – about Bollea’s physique, about the humiliation of a childhood idol, about fame-seeking.
不過，2012年時與Gawker影片有關的推特貼文，絕大多數是輕鬆的笑話，像是有關波利亞的體格、侮辱兒時偶像，以及追求名聲的笑話。

原文參照：
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/21/business/media/self-correcting-beyond-a-web-era-of-sensationalism.html

2016-04-03．聯合報．D2．紐約時報賞析．陳韋廷譯