Anything that makes a country's government more transparent is certainly a good thing, at least in democratic countries. These societies have a great deal to gain by being able to watch their elected government officials in action. But to broadly state that the more government proceedings that are televised, the more society will benefit is to ignore the fact that sometimes, less is more. Some types of proceedings can even be adversely affected if televised, making society worse off rather than giving it a benefit. Some types of governmental proceedings should receive more televised coverage, but there are some that should probably receive less to ensure that they are properly conducted.

One example of the possible negative effects of televising all governmental proceedings was the trial in the United States of accused murderer and former National Football League superstar O.J. Simpson. The trial was televised and became a huge media spectacle, captivating the nation's attention during the entire trial. Attorneys were well aware that the proceedings were being televised and almost behaved as if they were acting in a movie. The spotlight was so unrelenting that the circus atmosphere affected even the judge. The presence of television cameras and the effect of the intense media coverage led to a trial like no other, and adversely affected the natural progression of the trial. The participants played to the cameras rather than focusing on the task at hand. Largely because of television, many people would argue that justice was not served during this particular trial.

On the other hand, television of the day-to-day workings of government in action provides direct insight into how a government actually works. Because the television cameras are there everyday, the governmental officials become accustomed to them and are no longer greatly affected by their presence. In this way, society benefits because they are able to see what is happening as it happens. The government in action is no longer hidden behind such a veil of secrecy so that no one knows the mysterious ways of their elected officials.

One of the problems with stating that the more governmental proceedings that are televised, the better of a society is, is that people might come to believe that they are seeing everything when in fact, a television camera can only see part of what is happening no matter how many cameras there are. Much of what happens in government takes place "behind the scenes", not necessarily in full view of the cameras in the meeting place. While to an extent "seeing is believing", quite often it is what you don't see that makes the difference. Merely televising governmental proceedings certainly enhances understanding, but to fully understand the process a person would actually have to actively participate in that process.

Another problem with the statement that the more televised governmental proceedings, the better, is that it assumes that people actually watch the proceedings when they are broadcast. There is a television channel in the United States that broadcasts Congressional proceedings every day, but few people watch it. Only when some big issue comes up for a debate or for a vote does a significant number of people tune in. To merely televise governmental proceedings will not affect society unless society watches these events.

Society can certainly benefit from the television coverage of certain governmental proceedings. To actually see the elected officials in action can bring an extra element of understanding into the inner workings of a government. Politicians can be held accountable for their actions while they are being "watched" by the television cameras. No longer can they hide in anonymity while they are conducting the business of the people. But not all governmental proceedings should be televised. There are times when secrecy is an absolute requirement for making sure that the correct decisions are made.
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 (684 words)

参考译文

由于电视和全球性的电脑联网，人们现在可以了解从前没有见到的众多地方，其结果是旅游业会很快变得萧条

　　在任何一个社会里，总有一些人天生爱旅游，也有一些恋家的人喜欢他们所在的地方，根本没有到别处去游山玩水的愿望。大多数人们可能处于两个极端之间。由于电视频道更多了，电脑联络更快更方便了，普通人所能掌握的信息比历史上任何时候都多。但是，网络和电视不仅不会使旅游业萧条，反而会促使更多的人到更多的地方旅游。假如没有网络和电视，他们会永远都不知道这些地方。

　　在过去的年代里，人们能在报纸和杂志上了解到不同的地方，或者可能从收音机里听说一些。在电视发展的早期，电视设备不能被运到世界上某些更偏远的地区，这使得人们无从了解许多地方。即使当一个国家或某个大陆被描述或在电视上播放时，它似乎还是那些坚强的、敢于冒险的旅行者以外的人们所无法接近的遥远而又神秘的地方。飞机更是被看作一种新奇的事物或者只是为国内旅行所用。轮船能把人们带到遥远的地方，但要到达目的地，还需要几周或几个月的时间。普通人没有时间和金钱用于这样的境外旅游。

　　交通工具的令人难以置信的改进使得旅行不仅安全快捷，也更加舒适。欧洲和日本的一些地区的高速磁悬浮火车能以每小时高达三百公里的速度安全运送旅客；协和客机能在不到四小时的时间内把人们极其舒服地由纽约送到伦敦；能远航到几乎所有海港的大型巡游船已经被建设得能和世界上任意一处的五星级陆地酒店相媲美；甚至还有一些宇宙空间游客到外层的国际空间站旅行并安全返回地球。不仅是交通工具本身被大大地改善，这些工具所利用的高速公路和铁路也被大幅度地改进。迅速而可靠的交通工具使得人们可以到达前所未有的更多地方。

　　信息技术时代很可能也会因为普通人的可用信息的迅速增长而促使更多的人去旅游。了解一个国家正如同接近一台个人桌面电脑那样容易，一个人所熟悉的国家和地区越多，他或她发现一个自己想亲自旅游的地方的可能性就越大。以前所不为人知的岛上乐园和国家现在正通过电视和互联网使自己扬名并试图从每年消费于旅游的数十亿美元中赢得利润。全球的收入也增加了，这使得更多的人能够支付假期旅游的费用。

　　虽然可能会有一些人通过电视或电脑进行"虚拟"旅行，但也同样有可能在没有这样大量的信息可用的情况下，他们还是哪也不去。在美国的大峡谷游玩或在澳大利亚的大堡礁周围戴水肺跳水和在电视上或网络上观看并不是一回事；在阿尔卑斯山滑雪或是在苏格兰高地上呼吸新鲜空气必定是亲身经历的快乐；到一个中国本地的村民家中与他握手或品尝亚马逊河岸边友好的部落成员的烹调手艺都离不开旅行。技术只是增加了容易获取的知识；它并不能打消那些爱好旅行的人们的热情。