幸福来敲门

B |     "Social media is now the main source of information about the world for 16-24-year-olds, and for all ethnic minorities in the UK," explained Ellis Cashmore, honorary professor of sociology at Aston University in the UK.,"Yet platform moderators have practically unrestricted power to edit, and, if they wish, remove content. This is an unheard-of censorial power. I can't think that, in history, proprietors have ever had such colossal power to control the flow and content of information, not just to one population, but to the world.",The Online Safety Bill was first introduced in the British Parliament in March 2022 with the aim of holding social media platforms, search engines and various websites to account for hosting illegal activities or spreading harmful content.,The newly introduced amendment is "designed to guard against the arbitrary removal of articles from journalists at recognized news outlets when shared on social media platforms," according to the UK government's website. The authors of the amendment draw attention to the fact that half of British adults use social media for news, with Facebook*, Twitter and Instagram* being the most popular platforms. When it comes to 16-24 year-olds, the internet is the most-used platform.,Once the bill comes into force, social media giants would be required "to ensure recognized news publishers’ articles remain viewable and accessible on their sites even if they are under review by moderators.",Facebook Doesn't Know What Happens to Users' Data, How It Spreads as Regulators Tighten Their Grip27 April, 19:01 GMT,The introduction of the new amendment can be explained by the fact that the tech giants have proved themselves impossible to control, the professor explained.,"Tech companies operate in a relatively unrestricted way and governments around the world usually rely on the companies' goodwill," he said.,Still, the new amendment is focused on so-called "category one companies", which include "the largest and most popular social media platforms", and is not designed to shield alternative media sources.,The bill's selective approach has been manifested by its earlier amendment obligating social media platforms "to proactively look for and remove disinformation from foreign state actors which harm the UK." It specifically singles out Russian news, with an obvious reference to Sputnik News and RT - both previously banned by the EU and social media giants after the beginning of the Russian special operation to de-militarize and de-Nazify Ukraine.,"Freedom of speech and expression are highly valued principles in western Europe and North America," says Cashmore. "But it is interesting that, after the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine, there were no protests at the decisions of western governments to prohibit broadcasts and news supplies from RT, Sputnik and maybe a few less important news outlets.",EU Bans Work of Sputnik News Sites, Broadcasting of RT TV Channel in the Community From 2 March2 March, 11:53 GMT,The professor notes that wiping Russian news from the media sphere is senseless given that many westerners are interested in learning Russian perspectives. "This does not mean they would be persuaded or even influenced, but they feel entitled to make up their own minds independently. They have been denied that facility," Cashmore stressed.,"Since February, Russia, its people and its values have been condemned, denounced and stigmatized," said the professor. "Vladimir Putin has been personally vilified. It is difficult to see this ending, at least not for 30 years. Russia has been excluded from many world affairs and many believe Russia and the other BRICS countries may coalesce into an international configuration to rival NATO. This would become a new world order.",Meanwhile, the bill's amendments have raised concerns among British campaigners who are warning the government that in its current form the proposed internet safety laws are “on the verge of being unworkable," according to The Independent.,In particular, campaigners have advocated for a number of measures to strengthen freedom of expression and rights safeguards to better protect people from marginalized backgrounds and expand transparency requirements on firms to boost access to data for researchers and academics.,*Facebook and Instagram are banned in Russia over extremist activities.。面对主持人的质疑，耶伦称，“美国会非常明确地针对战略领域进行投资补贴，但我们不希望中国向产能严重过剩的企业提供大量补贴，这只会把我们的企业挤出市场”。

C | 中方对此有何评论？汪文斌资料图 （图源：外交部网站）汪文斌表示，我们注意到有关的报道。

D | 按照美方的逻辑，美国进行补贴就是“至关重要的产业投资”，别国进行补贴就是“令人担忧的不公平竞争”；美国向世界出口有比较优势的产品就是“自由贸易”，别国向世界出口有比较优势的产品就是“产能过剩”。用中国话来说，就是“只许州官放火，不许百姓点灯”。用美国话来讲，就是“我做了你不能学，我说了你必须做”（Do as I say not as I do）。说到底，美国就是在打着“产能过剩”的旗号对别国的先进产业进行打压，以“公平竞争”为借口搞保护主义，践踏市场经济原则和国际经贸规则，是赤裸裸的霸凌霸道。汪文斌重申，包括电动汽车、锂电池、光伏产品在内的中国新能源产业的快速发展建立在技术持续创新、完善的产供链体系和充分的市场竞争之上，取得的领先地位是比较优势和市场规律共同作用的结果，而非来自所谓的“补贴”。相反，近年来，美方相继签署《芯片与科学法案》《通胀削减法案》，通过数千亿美元的直接和间接补贴，直接干预市场资源配置。美国才是产业补贴的“大户”。他指出，补贴补不出产业竞争力，保护也保不出真正强大的企业。中国新能源产业的快速发展符合世界经济实现绿色转型的需要，有利于中国，有利于美国，也有利于世界。“我们奉劝美方，摒弃心口不一的虚伪和双标，不要再重蹈保护主义的覆辙。

E | ”