【正文】
not charitable corporations [D]were in a desperate situation 27. Some newspapers refused delivery to distant suburbs probably because 2 Whatever happened to the death of newspaper? A year ago the end seemed near. The recession threatened to remove the advertising and readers that had not already fled to the internet. Newspapers like the San Francisco Chronicle were chronicling their own doom. America’s Federal Trade mission launched a round of talks about how to save newspapers. Should they bee charitable corporations? Should the state subsidize them ? It will hold another meeting soon. But the discussions now seem out of date. In much of the world there is the sign of crisis. German and Brazilian papers have shrugged off the recession. Even American newspapers, which inhabit the most troubled e of the global industry, have not only survived but often returned to profit. Not the 20% profit margins that were routine a few years ago, but profit all the same. It has not been much fun. Many papers stayed afloat by pushing journalists overboard. The American Society of News Editors reckons that 13,500 newsroom jobs have gone since 2007. Readers are paying more for slimmer products. Some papers even had the nerve to refuse delivery to distant suburbs. Yet these desperate measures have proved the right ones and, sadly for many journalists, they can be pushed further. Newspapers are being more balanced businesses, with a healthier mix of revenues from readers and advertisers. American papers have long been highly unusual in their reliance on ads. Fully 87% of their revenues came from advertising in 2008, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation amp。態(tài)度題:文章各個段落都說outside director的方面。細節(jié)題:原文是若干個并列,stock is likely to perform worse對應答案, 迷惑選項是B,但是主語不一致20%是probability不是earnings?! ?2.C。 . [A]generous investors [B]unbiased executives [C]share price forecasters [D]independent advisers 23. According to the researchers from Ohio University after an outside director’s surprise departure, the firm is likely to . [A]gaining excessive profits [B]failing to fulfill her duty[C]refusing to make promises [D]leaving the board in tough times 22. We learn from Paragraph 2 that outside directors are supposed to be how could she have let those enormous bonus payouts pass unremarked? By February the next year Ms. Simmons had left the board. The position was just taking up too much time, she said. Outside directors are supposed to serve as helpful, yet less biased, advisers on a firm’s board. Having made their wealth and their reputations elsewhere, they presumably have enough independence to disagree with the chief executive’s proposals. If the sky, and the share price is falling, outside directors should be able to give advice based on having weathered their own crises. The researchers from Ohio University used a database hat covered more than 10,000 firms and more than 64,000 different directors between 1989 and 2004. Then they simply checked which directors stayed from one proxy statement to the next. The most likely reason for departing a board was age, so the researchers concentrated on those “surprise” disappearances by directors under the age of 70. They fount that after a surprise departure, the probability that the pany will subsequently have to restate earnings increased by nearly 20%. The likelihood of being named in a federal classaction lawsuit also increases, and the stock is likely to perform worse. The effect tended to be larger for larger firms. Although a correlation between them leaving and subsequent bad performance at the firm is suggestive, it does not mean that such directors are always jumping off a sinking ship. Often they “trade up.” Leaving riskier, smaller firms for larger and more stable firms. But the researchers believe that outside directors have an easier time of avoiding a blow to their reputations if they leave a firm before bad news breaks, even if a review of history shows they were on the board at the time any wrongdoing occurred. Firms who want to keep their outside director