巴黎气候协定：川普被中国教做人

原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：renayuki 转载请注明出处

While he did not mention the US or Donald Trump, Mr Li's comments were clearly addressed to Washington.
I'm not a climate change denier, nor am I a Trump fan, I don't live in the US and I am not an American, but I can't understand why these news providers can't just report the news as is without a click-bait title.

原文说：“虽然没有直说，但是很明显就是说的美国”
我虽然不是川粉，我都不是美国人，但是文章就这么标题党不好吧

The Independent is absolutely notorious for using jumped-to conclusions or assumed innuendos as their headlines. It's a shame, since the articles are generally well written and pretty reasonable; the headlines are almost always misleading, though.

独立者报就喜欢搞个大新闻。其实文章写的挺好的，就是标题都是uc震惊部的。

jumped-to conclusions or assumed innuendos as their headlines. I wonder if this has anything to do with its popularity on this sub :o :o

标题党带节奏不是很正常嘛，要不然怎么卖新闻 :O 

Anti-Trump news is the most reliable product in the entire economy these days.

这年头就指望着写反川新闻来钱了

[copy]Sure. Trump could make a typo on Twitter, refuse to own it, and it'd dominate the news cycle in the western world for 24hrs.
I'm not a Trump fan by any measure, but the number of people that think he's going down in flames simply because of the headlines inside this filter bubble is insane.
It's fairly clear that these media outlets have learned to cater to anti-Trump people the same way that Brietbart and Fox cater to right-wing media consumers.
If you want to actually follow the news now, you need to visit 5 different sources and put it together like a goddamned jigsaw puzzle, otherwise you're very likely missing a good part of the bigger picture...

川普在推上拼错一个词，媒体就讲了一整天，搞得跟川普明天就要挂了一样。你们川黑能不能有点技术含量？这么搞下去跟无脑川吹有什么区别？我一个吃瓜群众现在一条消息要找五个来源互相印证，想安安静静看新闻搞得跟破案一样，一不小心就被带了节奏……

AKA "Doing your own research and coming to your own conclusions, rather than taking prompts to pick up a pitchfork, because that's all the fucking media is anymore".

顶楼上，你得自己做研究得出自己的结论，不能看主流媒体带节奏，现在这些玩意不是五毛吹就是脑残黑。

Precisely. At some point it became an unreasonable expectation that news outlets deliver the news without pre-writing it to appeal to a specific ideological group.
Your point is made well though - anyone who actually gives a shit should already be doing this sort of research and fact checking.
IMO this isn't a news problem or an ideological problem, it's a cultural/economic problem. If news outlets existed only to provide the news in a fair and unbiased way, they'd die in the current media environment because they'd inevitably piss off everyone at one point... By sexting for a specific ideological group and writing to the tastes of those readers, they have found a foothold that may allow them to generate enough revenue to continue existing.

完全正确。不过新闻本来都是按照受众套路写的，你要认真就必须自己研究。这不是说媒体不行了人心不古，而是眼下经济文化不景气。认真做新闻的都已经被骂死了，活下来的都是迎合特定人群收脑残税的。[/copy]

If you want to actually follow the news now, you need to visit 5 different sources and put it together like a goddamned jigsaw puzzle, otherwise you're very likely missing a good part of the bigger picture...
That's how it's always been.

是的，一向如此。

I remember a time where I could legitimately cite CNN for non political pieces. It used to be relegated to the political and opinion areas up until the early 2000's for most of the major news providers. Can't even do that in good conscience now.

当年CNN的非政治类消息还可以当可靠来源放文章里面呢，2000年前主流媒体还鄙视CNN政治新闻，现在都成了一路货色。

"Fighting climate change is a global consensus, it's not invented by China"
It's pretty obvious who these comments are aimed at

但是文章也说了“气候变化是国际共识，不是什么中国发明的阴谋”，这明显就是在说那个谁

Yeah in this case I don't think they had to jump far.

是啊这个标题我觉得还好啦

It's pretty sad that over 5,000 people are upset that an obvious, totally indisputable fact was stated out loud. The telegraph is a tabloid, but this title isn't even slightly off or misleading.

这个小报虽然一向八卦但是这个标题这次没有一点问题好不好，楼上还有5000+的点赞这实在太悲哀了

Nobody honestly reading his statements could say he wasn't addressing them to Trump, the only world leader who is considering pulling out of the agreement. Given that, how is the title inaccurate? It would be far more misleading and provide less useful information if they didn't read between the lines to the clearly intended meaning.
News outlets have to provide context, because if you didn't know anything about the context here the whole "not invented by China line" doesn't mean anything to you. Anyone who understands the context knows that's a reference to Trump given his statements on global warming being invented by the Chinese. There's a difference between click bait spin and providing necessary context to a story.

看了文章的人都明白说的就是川普好吧，就他一个没有签协定。这个标题把字里行间的意思说出来了，明明没有问题。有些人不明白“气候问题是中国发明的阴谋”这个梗其实是川普说的，在标题里面点明很好啊怎么能叫标题党呢？

China doesn't call people out directly usually, the title isn't far off. Now independent makes sensational headlines, just people complaining about this one need to calm down because the title actually does summarize what was said. China got as close as possible to saying Trump without saying his name.

中国人一向很含蓄的，标题没有什么问题。独立者报是一向标题党，但是这次很正常，中国人就差直接点川普的名字了

This statement is absolutely addressed at Trump-- he's the one fighting the bill. Mr. Li was only being respectful by not saying Trump's name; when the article says it's "addressed to Washington", that means the president.

说的就是川普，他退出的协定啦。就是礼貌一下不直接点名。

You have to understand how China communicates politics with the world. It's never direct and it needs to be interpreted and contextualized to make sense for you and me.

中国人就这么说官话的，都需要翻译的