1、For the first time on record,the number of advertising-specific jobs in the U.S.is declining in the middle of an economic expansion,according to government data.What's going on?It's certainly not a case of fewer advertisements.The typical American has gone from seeing about 500 ads each day in the 1970s to about 5,000 today,according to a common industry statistic.That is one corporate message for roughly every 10 seconds of waking life.Instead,the mysterious decline can be explained by two developments.First,there are Facebook and Google.They are the largest advertising companies in the world-and,quite likely,the largest in the history of the world.Last year,90 percent of the growth of the digital-advertising business went to just these two firms.Facebook and Google are so profitable because they use their enormous scale and data to deliver targeted advertising at a low cost.This has forced the world's large advertising firms to preserve their profitability through a series of mergers,accompanied by jobs cut.s in the name of efficiency.The emergence of an advertising duopoly has coincided with the rise of"programmatic advertising,"a term that essentially means"companies using algorithms to buy and place ads in those little boxes all over the internet."As any Macl Men fan might intuit,advertising has long been a relationship-driven business,in which multimillion-dollar contracts are hammered out over one-on-one meetings,countless lunches,and even more-countless drinks.With programmatic technology,however,companies can buy access to specific audiences across several publishing platforms at once,bypassing the work of building relationships with each one.That process produces more ads and requires fewer people-or,at least,fewer traditional advertising jobs and more technical jobs.Second,there is the merging of the advertising and entertainment businesses.As smartphone screens have edged out TV as the most important real estate for media,companies have invested more in"branded content"-corporate-sponsored media,such as an article or video,that resembles traditional entertainment more than it does traditional advertising.Some of the most prominent names in journalism,such as The New York Times,BuzzFeed,Vice,and The Atlantic,are owned by companies that have launched their own branded-content shops,which operate as stand-alone divisions.As many media companies have tried to become more like advertising companies,the value of the average"creative-account win,"an ad-industry term for a new contract,has declined,falling by about 40 percent between 2016 and 2017.So there are two major themes of the decline of advertising jobs,one that has to do with the companies that now create them and one that has to do with the way brands prefer to market themselves nowadays.In short,the future of the advertising business is being moved to technology companies managing ad networks and media companies making branded content-that is,away from the ad agencies. Which of the following would be the best title for the text?

　　A Where Did All the Advertising Jobs Go?

　　B How Do Facebook and Google Produce Ads?

　　C Why is the Number of Ads Declining?

　　D What is the Future of the Advertising Business?

　　正确答案：A  

　　答案解析：本文首段提出现象“广告业工作数量在减少”。随后阐释两个原因：Facebook和Google使技术工作取代广告工作;广告和媒体业务融合使媒体公司取代广告公司。末段总结指出：广告业务正在从广告公司向Facebook、Google以及媒体公司转移。可见A.为全文关注现象，为恰当题目。[解题技巧]B.错误有二：首先以偏概全，全文论述广告工作减少的两大原因，“Facebook和Google”只是其中一个原因;其次偏离文章重点：文章关注点在于“Facebook和Google对广告业工作的影响”，并非“二者如何制作广告”。C.将全文论述主体“广告工作的减少(the decline of advertising jobs)”篡改为“广告数量的减少(the number of ads is declining)”。D.源于第六段末句，但作者重在分析“广告工作的走向”，并非“广告业的未来前景”。

　　2、

　　Thousands of papers are submitted every month to the platforms arXiv and bioRxiv,which make manuscripts available before they have been peer reviewed and accepted by a journal.Scientists applaud preprints because they enable researchers to claim priority and make their findings available more quickly,unshackled from sluggish and tyrannical journals.This might make sense within the scientific community,but this method of publication holds substantial risks for the broadcr community-risks that are not being given proper consideration by the champions of preprint.Weak work that hasn't been reviewed could get overblown in the media.Conversely,better work could be ignored.Many people still learn about science the same way they learn about Syria or the World Cup:through news sites,television and radio.The bulk of research reported through these channels is peer reviewed.A few days before a paper is published,the science journal will issue a restricted press release to qualified journalists under an agreement that no one will report on the paper until a designated time.The system has its flaws,but it does give reporters time to assess the research and gather expert reaction.Contrast this with preprints.As soon as research is in the public domain,there is nothing to stop a journalist writing about it,and rushing to be the first to do so.Imagine early findings that seem to show that climate change is natural or that a common vaccine is unsafe.Preprints on subjects such as those could,if they become a story that goes viral,end up misleading millions,whether or not that was the intention of the authors.Another risk is the inverse-and this one could matter more to some researchers.Under the preprint system,one daring journalist searching through the servers can break a story;by the time other reporters have noticed,it's old news,and they can't persuade their editors to publish.There have been cases in which a preprint that garnered news stories got a second wave of coverage when it was published in a journal.But generally,the rule is'it has to be new to be news'.It is not enough to shrug and blame journalists,and it is unhelpful to dismiss those journalists who can accurately convey complex science to a mass audience.Journalists do include appropriate warnings or even decide not to run a story when conclusions are uncertain,but that happens only because they have been given enough time and breathing space to assess it.If the scientific community isn't careful,preprints coulcl take that resource away.How can we have preprints and support good journalism?Should scientific societies or preprint advocates develop guidelines for what should and should not be posted as a preprint?Should all preprints be emblazoned with a warning aimed at journalists that work has not been peer reviewed'?Preprints could bring great prizes for science.But these questions must be brought up now,so that public understanding is not damaged as preprints flourish. One problem with the preprint system is that

　　A scientists rend to sacrifice accuracy in the rush to publish.

　　B journalists may report on preprints against the authors'will.

　　C news media may dismiss formal publications as old news.

　　D journals may refuse to consider preprinted papers.

　　正确答案：C  

　　答案解析：第四、五段指出预印本的两项风险(Preprints.…could.…end up.…Another risk.…)。第五段先指出“预印系统下，科研成果经一家媒体报道后，就会视作旧闻，难获再次报道”，随后以“让步一转折”进一步明确”虽有预印本正式发表后又掀起报道热潮的情况，但通常‘新闻必须是新的”’，由此可知“正式出版的论文很可能被媒体视作旧闻而不予报道”，C.正确。[解题技巧]A.由第四段②句“新闻记者行为”与第四段③句“部分科学家行为：发布劣质研究”杂糅而来，但文中并未提到“科学家发布劣质研究的原因是‘为求速度忽视质量”’。B.源自第四段④句whether or not that was the intention of the authors，但文中指“‘劣质研究广泛传播、误导大众’的结果是必 然的，与作者本意无关”，而非“‘。记者报道研究成果’的行为违背作者本意”。D.将第五段中所述“拒绝曾发布过预印本的论文”的行为主体由“新闻媒体”偷换为“学术期刊”。

　　3、For the first time on record,the number of advertising-specific jobs in the U.S.is declining in the middle of an economic expansion,according to government data.What's going on?It's certainly not a case of fewer advertisements.The typical American has gone from seeing about 500 ads each day in the 1970s to about 5,000 today,according to a common industry statistic.That is one corporate message for roughly every 10 seconds of waking life.Instead,the mysterious decline can be explained by two developments.First,there are Facebook and Google.They are the largest advertising companies in the world-and,quite likely,the largest in the history of the world.Last year,90 percent of the growth of the digital-advertising business went to just these two firms.Facebook and Google are so profitable because they use their enormous scale and data to deliver targeted advertising at a low cost.This has forced the world's large advertising firms to preserve their profitability through a series of mergers,accompanied by jobs cut.s in the name of efficiency.The emergence of an advertising duopoly has coincided with the rise of"programmatic advertising,"a term that essentially means"companies using algorithms to buy and place ads in those little boxes all over the internet."As any Macl Men fan might intuit,advertising has long been a relationship-driven business,in which multimillion-dollar contracts are hammered out over one-on-one meetings,countless lunches,and even more-countless drinks.With programmatic technology,however,companies can buy access to specific audiences across several publishing platforms at once,bypassing the work of building relationships with each one.That process produces more ads and requires fewer people-or,at least,fewer traditional advertising jobs and more technical jobs.Second,there is the merging of the advertising and entertainment businesses.As smartphone screens have edged out TV as the most important real estate for media,companies have invested more in"branded content"-corporate-sponsored media,such as an article or video,that resembles traditional entertainment more than it does traditional advertising.Some of the most prominent names in journalism,such as The New York Times,BuzzFeed,Vice,and The Atlantic,are owned by companies that have launched their own branded-content shops,which operate as stand-alone divisions.As many media companies have tried to become more like advertising companies,the value of the average"creative-account win,"an ad-industry term for a new contract,has declined,falling by about 40 percent between 2016 and 2017.So there are two major themes of the decline of advertising jobs,one that has to do with the companies that now create them and one that has to do with the way brands prefer to market themselves nowadays.In short,the future of the advertising business is being moved to technology companies managing ad networks and media companies making branded content-that is,away from the ad agencies. The underlined phrase"the companies"(Line 2,Para.6)mainly refers to

　　A ad agencies.

　　B media companies.

　　C Facebook and Google.

　　D branded content makers.

　　正确答案：C  

　　答案解析：第六段首句总结广告工作减少的两大原因，前者对应第一个原因(Facebook和Google的出现).后者对应第二个原因(广告与娱乐产业融合)。由上文可知，Facebook和Google的程序性广告使传统广告工作减少，技术性广告工作增加，即：第六段首句the companies指代Facebook and Google;create them指“生成技术性广告工作”.C.正确。[解题技巧]A.与第六段末句“广告业务正从广告代理公司转移出来，即广告代理公司无法再创造更多广告工作”相悖。B.利用文中另一重要对象meclia companies做干扰。但与之相连的是第二个原因(the way brands prefer to market themselves)，即“它是品牌化内容的生产者”，并非第一个原因中the companies所指。D.实则与media companies同指(由第五段论述及第六段末句media companies making branded content可知)，故同排除。

　　4、Thousands of papers are submitted every month to the platforms arXiv and bioRxiv,which make manuscripts available before they have been peer reviewed and accepted by a journal.Scientists applaud preprints because they enable researchers to claim priority and make their findings available more quickly,unshackled from sluggish and tyrannical journals.This might make sense within the scientific community,but this method of publication holds substantial risks for the broadcr community-risks that are not being given proper consideration by the champions of preprint.Weak work that hasn't been reviewed could get overblown in the media.Conversely,better work could be ignored.Many people still learn about science the same way they learn about Syria or the World Cup:through news sites,television and radio.The bulk of research reported through these channels is peer reviewed.A few days before a paper is published,the science journal will issue a restricted press release to qualified journalists under an agreement that no one will report on the paper until a designated time.The system has its flaws,but it does give reporters time to assess the research and gather expert reaction.Contrast this with preprints.As soon as research is in the public domain,there is nothing to stop a journalist writing about it,and rushing to be the first to do so.Imagine early findings that seem to show that climate change is natural or that a common vaccine is unsafe.Preprints on subjects such as those could,if they become a story that goes viral,end up misleading millions,whether or not that was the intention of the authors.Another risk is the inverse-and this one could matter more to some researchers.Under the preprint system,one daring journalist searching through the servers can break a story;by the time other reporters have noticed,it's old news,and they can't persuade their editors to publish.There have been cases in which a preprint that garnered news stories got a second wave of coverage when it was published in a journal.But generally,the rule is'it has to be new to be news'.It is not enough to shrug and blame journalists,and it is unhelpful to dismiss those journalists who can accurately convey complex science to a mass audience.Journalists do include appropriate warnings or even decide not to run a story when conclusions are uncertain,but that happens only because they have been given enough time and breathing space to assess it.If the scientific community isn't careful,preprints coulcl take that resource away.How can we have preprints and support good journalism?Should scientific societies or preprint advocates develop guidelines for what should and should not be posted as a preprint?Should all preprints be emblazoned with a warning aimed at journalists that work has not been peer reviewed'?Preprints could bring great prizes for science.But these questions must be brought up now,so that public understanding is not damaged as preprints flourish. The author suggests in the last paragraph that preprints

　　A are incompatible with good journalism.

　　B should be forbidden for quality concerns.

　　C are usually misinterpreted by journalists.

　　D could promote confusion and distortion.

　　正确答案：D  

　　答案解析：末段先提出问题“如何在保有预印本的同时助力良性新闻”，随后指出科学界应考量“制定发布指导原则、加设警告标识”等诸多问题，以避免“预印本损害公众认知之可能”。由此可知，作者意在“提请科学界关注预印本潜藏风险、立即采取行动”，D.体现“预印本损害公众认知之风险”。[解题技巧]A.、B.与末段①句传递之意“应实现保有预印本的同时助力良性新闻”相悖。C.由末段③句a warning aimed at journalists臆断而来，但“对记者的警告”旨在“提醒记者论文未经评审、应注意审核评估”，并非“告诫记者不要主观扭曲研究”。

　　5、For the first time on record,the number of advertising-specific jobs in the U.S.is declining in the middle of an economic expansion,according to government data.What's going on?It's certainly not a case of fewer advertisements.The typical American has gone from seeing about 500 ads each day in the 1970s to about 5,000 today,according to a common industry statistic.That is one corporate message for roughly every 10 seconds of waking life.Instead,the mysterious decline can be explained by two developments.First,there are Facebook and Google.They are the largest advertising companies in the world-and,quite likely,the largest in the history of the world.Last year,90 percent of the growth of the digital-advertising business went to just these two firms.Facebook and Google are so profitable because they use their enormous scale and data to deliver targeted advertising at a low cost.This has forced the world's large advertising firms to preserve their profitability through a series of mergers,accompanied by jobs cut.s in the name of efficiency.The emergence of an advertising duopoly has coincided with the rise of"programmatic advertising,"a term that essentially means"companies using algorithms to buy and place ads in those little boxes all over the internet."As any Macl Men fan might intuit,advertising has long been a relationship-driven business,in which multimillion-dollar contracts are hammered out over one-on-one meetings,countless lunches,and even more-countless drinks.With programmatic technology,however,companies can buy access to specific audiences across several publishing platforms at once,bypassing the work of building relationships with each one.That process produces more ads and requires fewer people-or,at least,fewer traditional advertising jobs and more technical jobs.Second,there is the merging of the advertising and entertainment businesses.As smartphone screens have edged out TV as the most important real estate for media,companies have invested more in"branded content"-corporate-sponsored media,such as an article or video,that resembles traditional entertainment more than it does traditional advertising.Some of the most prominent names in journalism,such as The New York Times,BuzzFeed,Vice,and The Atlantic,are owned by companies that have launched their own branded-content shops,which operate as stand-alone divisions.As many media companies have tried to become more like advertising companies,the value of the average"creative-account win,"an ad-industry term for a new contract,has declined,falling by about 40 percent between 2016 and 2017.So there are two major themes of the decline of advertising jobs,one that has to do with the companies that now create them and one that has to do with the way brands prefer to market themselves nowadays.In short,the future of the advertising business is being moved to technology companies managing ad networks and media companies making branded content-that is,away from the ad agencies. With programmatic technology,Facebook and Google could

　　A produce more ads and create more advertising jobs.

　　B merge a series of large advertising companies.

　　C deliver advertising to specific audiences at a low cost.

　　D build relationships with publishing platforms one by one.

　　正确答案：C  

　　答案解析：第三段指出Facebook和Google广告盈利巨大并说明原因：以低成本投放定向广告(deliver targeted advertising at a low cost)。第四段进而说明Facebook和Google的广告模式：利用编程技术向特定用户投放广告(buy access to specific audiences)。结合二者可知，C.正确.Targeted advertising与(advertise to)specific audiences同义。[解题技巧]A.半对(produce more ads)半错(create more advertising jobs)：第四段末句指出，程序性广告模式生产的广告更多，需要的人力却更少。B.将第三段末句“(Facebook和Google的垄断地位迫使)大型广告公司之间(large advertising firms)进行合并”曲解为“Facebook和Google兼并了一系列大型广告公司”。D.与第四段③句“公司可以利用编程技术一次性购买多个发布平台的访问权限，绕开逐一建立关系的步骤(bypassing.…each one)”相悖。

　　☛☛☛进入2022年研究生考试练习题库>>>更多考研试题(每日一练、模拟试卷、历年真题、易错题)等你来做!