Dr. Zhang: Tom 在中美两国都居住过，也对双方的文化历史有比较深入的理解。Tom，在美国Fox究竟是一个怎样的电台？翠西一开始就强调她代表了个人观点，并向她的观众指出刘欣的背景，那么刘欣也做了回应。你怎么看？

Tom has lived in both China and the United States with a deeper understanding of the culture and history of both sides. Tom, what is your general impression of Fox News and its network in the United States? At the beginning, Trish emphasized that she represented her personal point of view and pointed out the background of Liu Xin to the audience, then Xin also responded immediately. What is your thoughts on that?

Tom: Fox Business Network 是Fox News集团下的一个从属电台。在政治立场上属于右翼，同时在共和党内比较有影响力。 事实上现任总统川普基本就是看这个电台来获取信息。他只看这一个电台也常会提到这个电台。同时这个电台也有和自己立场相投的连带群体。比如在和Xin问答后，请来的Hudson Institution的Michael Pillsbury，都是现任总统的支持者。 可以说它在美国一小部分人里是非常有影响力的一个电台。

Fox Business Network is a subordinate radio station under the Fox News Group. It belongs to the right wing in the political position and is more influential in the Republican Party. In fact, the current president, Trump, basically watches this station to get information. He watches only this news channel and often mentions this channel. At the same time, this station also has a group of people who share similar views. For example, after Xin’s interview, Michael Pillsbury of Hudson Institution was invited for a talk who is a supporter of the current president. It can be said that it is a very influential channel in a very small number of people in the United States.

我们做了一些数据调查1，可以让大家进步一了解Fox News和它从属的Fox Business Network 电台在美国社会的听众结构。 从整体人数上来讲， 虽然在过去的一年中， Fox News prime time 的收视率有所提高，但是也只是占全国人口的1%。与其他三个老牌电台比，ABC world news tonight 和NBC nightly news 黄金时段观众都是Fox news 的三倍。 CBS evening news 在黄金时段的收视率也是fox news 的二倍。 所以Tom说的在一小部分人里有影响力的电台是有依据的。 那么究竟是怎样的一小部分人群呢？ 我们来看看下面包括政治观点及观众人口统计的基本数据。 因为没有Fox Business Network 的细节数据，我们使用Fox News 的整体数据来代表这一电台普遍的人群特征。 同时我们还和MSNBC电台做一个对比。

We collected some secondary data to help our readers better understand the demographics of Fox News and its affiliated Fox Business Network viewers in the states. In terms of the overall number of people, although the ratings of Fox News prime time have increased in the past year, they only account for 1% of the national population. Compared to the 3 main channels, Fox News is still behind. ABC world news tonight and NBC nightly news have three times prime time viewers than Fox News. CBS evening news have also twice of the viewers than fox news in prime time. So this proves what Tom describes as “influential in a small group of people”. So how does this small group of people look like? Let's take a look at some basic demographics. Because there is no detailed data from the Fox Business Network, we use the overall data from Fox News to represent the general demographics of this station. At the same time, MSNBC data is provided as a comparison.

年龄分布： 观众50% 都是50岁以上的人群，这和MSNBC没有太大差别。

Age distribution: Majority are 50 years or older, not much difference between the two channels.

种族分布： 观众74% 都是白人，比MSNBC稍稍高一点。

Ethnicity: 74% are white, slightly higher than MSNBC, not a big difference.

社会经济状况： 大部分是中产或之上的人群，与MSNBC差别不大。

Social Economical status (self-reported): majority is middle class or above. Not much difference between the two channels.

受教育程度： 在这方面可以看出比较大的差别。Fox News 70%的观众不具备大学以下文凭。 明显MSNBC的观众在大学和大学之上的比例远超出Fox News.

Education level: this is where we start to see a big difference. 70% of fox news viewers have below college level education, whereas MSNBC has a lot more viewers with college or above education level.

政治党派： 当然两台最大的分歧还是在政治取向上。

Political affiliation: of course, most prominent difference lies in political views.

“

Tom: 至于说Trish到底是不是代表她自己的意见，这一点倒是没有那么重要，她主要想表现和传递给观众她是中立的。但是很明显如果她的意见和她的电台相互冲突的话，我们很难想象她可以一直在这个电台主持她的节目。翠西使用了一些技巧，她的态度和语气从一开始就把刘欣放在一个很defensive的位置上， 用了那些一部分美国人脑子里惯有的“可怕”形象的词，其实都是在给她的听众做一些强化，也就是翠西从始至终都在控制整个对话的基调。 欣从始至终没有反问翠西任何问题，一直处于一个比较被动的位置。整体感觉双方有着不同的意图。翠西有意识地要强化她的听众对于中国的固有而片面的理解和认知。欣是有要进行一场对话想让听众听到另一边的立场。 对于这个电台固有的听众来说，他们对于中国的看法基本不会因为这个对话而改变（当然我们可以通过采样数据进行一些调研核实）。在此之外，翠西在语气表达上还带有一种居高临下的姿态。对于母语是英文的人来说都是很容易注意到这些细节。 整个对话的进程是已经被设定的了。 我并不觉得这是一个让普通美国人民更好地了解中国的渠道。之后我们可以再多说一下这个问题。

As for whether Trish represents her own opinion, this is not so important. She mainly wants to express and pass on to the audience that she is neutral. However it is clear that if her opinion conflicts with Fox, it is hard to imagine that she could continue to host her program on that channel. Trish used some techniques. Her attitude and tone put Liu Xin in a very defensive position from the beginning, using words related to some "terrible" image that some Americans used to have about China in their minds. Trish was controlling the tone of the whole conversation from beginning to end. Xin was not able to ask any questions and was mostly reactively answering questions from Trish. The overall feeling is that both sides have opposite agendas. Trish purposefully tried to reinforce one-sided understanding of China of her audience. Xin intended to have a sincere conversation to let the audience hear the other side of the story. The audience of this channel’s view of China will not change substantially because of this dialogue (of course we can do some survey and verify this thought). In addition, Trish also had a very condescending tone and other things which native speakers could easily pick up on. The whole program is set. I don't think this is a channel for the average American people to better understand China. We can talk a bit more about this later.

Dr. Zhang: 那么说到语气表达，这对于语言学习以及对比中美文化来说是个非常有趣的话题。我看过翠西在“辩论”前的一些播报片段，其实她的语气在这场问答中已经缓和了很多。我不知道之前的那些播报是在故意吸引眼球还是用一种很戏剧的手法来煽动观众的某种情绪，在我看来作为一名新闻频道主持都不够专业。电视主持可以有自己的观点和立场，但是新闻播报的使命应该是尽可能客观地多角度地播报事实，让观众自己进行分析和决策。我们下面再从文化和沟通方式上来谈一下这场对话。最初翠西称其为辩论，但是在我们看来变成了一场问答。Tom, 你是否觉得有下面几个因素让辩论没有成为辩论。 首先对话的语言是英文，并非欣的本国语言，在这样的一个现场直播节目中，难免会有压力，使用外语就多了一层障碍，即便欣已经是顶尖英语高手了。 其次，如果足够了解中国文化，这个礼仪之邦，一般做客别人家的时候都要尽量保持礼貌。有些评论说到一开始欣的典型中式客套话在一般美国人听来都是比较卑微了。 了解中国文化的人则知道这是谦敬的表达而已。第三从沟通方式来讲，中西有别。

So in terms of language expression, this is a very interesting topic for second language acquisition and cross-cultural comparison. I have seen some of the previous clips of Trish before the "Debate". In fact, she has toned down a lot during the Q&A. I don't know if the previous clips were deliberately to catch attention and/or to emotionally arouse her audience. In my opinion, as a news channel host, this is not professional. A TV host can have his/her own views and positions, but the mission of the news broadcasting should be to report the facts as objectively as possible and to allow the audience to analyze and make decisions themselves. Let's talk about this conversation from the perspective of communication style in different cultures. Initially, Trish called it a debate, but it turned out to be a question and answer in our opinion. Tom, do you think there are several factors that may contribute to this? First of all, the conversation was carried out in English. It is not the native language of Xin. In such a live broadcast program, there will inevitably be pressure. Secondly, if you know enough about Chinese culture, this state of etiquette should be as polite as possible when you are a guest. Some commentators say that the typical Chinese-style opening is too humble to make most Americans think she deserves this conversation. Those who understand Chinese culture well know that this is just a modest expression. Third, in terms of communication style, there is a difference between China and the West.

Tom: 确实如此，就沟通方式来讲，中国文化很少鼓励正面冲突尤其是在公共场所。比较偏向提倡回避。但是在美国直面冲突则是勇气的表现。 尤其近年来，美国电视通过上演冲突来获取收视率。这的确是一个文化理念上的差异。所以从这一点看来，这不是一场政治辩论，更向是一方以一种戏剧的形式来博得眼球,并强化一些固有形象。在不同文化间交流尤其要注意了解各自的文化背景，才可以保持一个比较畅通的交流。实际上， 美国文化比较强调赢得一场辩论，是否有说服力。不见得赢的一方就是真理。 如果你可以说服对方，你就是赢家。这其实是比较有哲理性的问题，也是一个很复杂的问题，要了解对方的哲学思想历史，中国有很长很长的历史但是也有发展很快的当代文化和思维.

Indeed, in terms of communication styles, Chinese culture rarely encourages positive conflicts, especially in public places. More likely to promote avoidance. But confronting conflicts in the United States is a manifestation of courage. Especially in recent years, American television has used conflicts to engage viewers. This is indeed a cultural difference. So from this point of view, this is not a political debate. It is more about the fact that one side tried to catch attention in a dramatic form and reinforced some old images. When communicate across culturally, it is necessary to understand each other’s cultural background in order to maintain an effective communication. In fact, American culture emphasizes whether it is convincing. The winning side is not necessarily right. If you can convince others, you are the winner. This is actually a more philosophical question, but also a very complicated issue. To understand each other's culture and history, China has a long and long history but also has a developing more modern culture and thinking

Dr. Zhang: 对于Fox本身的观众还是其他观众通过其他渠道看到这场对话的人来说，这场对话到底有没有带来一些变化呢？ 这里New York Times 引用了Professor Repnikova的一段评论2。 你觉得这是事实还只是希望而已？

For the audience of Fox or other viewers who watched this conversation through other channels, has this dialogue changed their view of China? Here the New York Times cites a commentary 2 from Professor Repnikova. Do you think this is a fact and just wishful thinking?

“It seemed like the strategy was to show up, be open, showcase yourself and show that China is open,” said Maria Repnikova, assistant professor of global communications at Georgia State University who researches Chinese media. “Seeing someone speaking perfect English and answering questions in an open and eloquent way is already a very different China than most Americans are used to seeing.” （New York Times）”

Tom： 我觉得就这次来说这只是希望而已. 当然我并不否则在某一天这有可能发生。就目前情况来说，很多人对于中国没有直接了解，所以很多人可能会一直认为这只不过是一个被政府培养出来没有自己思想的代言人罢了。很多美国人不了解在中国学习英文是一种普遍现象。从小学开始就有英文的系统学习。在中国其实非常鼓励学习另外一种语言。然后在美国从来没有学习其他语言这种想法。 需要很多的努力和很长的时间，去消除一些偏见。 比如一些理念认为中国无法创新。其实创新这个概念就是在已有的基础上变得更好，不一定要完全是一个全新的事物。目前听到很多关于“窃取”的指责，其实很多美国人可能都不了解美国自己是如何走到今天这一步的。 从人类文明的历史来讲， 我们都是在互相学习，在已有的基础上进步。 在和平年代我们会看到更多的共享互学理念，然后在有冲突的年代，人们会喜欢用另外一种方式解释所发生的事情，带有更多的冷战思维。

I think this is just a wishful thinking for this time. Of course, it might happen someday. As far as the current situation is concerned, many people do not have a direct understanding of China, so many people may always think that this is just a spokesperson who has been trained by the government without her own thinking. Many Americans do not understand that learning English in China is a common phenomenon. From elementary school, there is systematic learning in English. As a matter of fact, China encourages learning of a second language unlike here, most American do not know how to speak a second language. It takes a lot of effort and a long time to break some stereotypes. For example, the idea that China cannot innovate. In fact, the concept of innovation is to modify what we have and make it better, not necessarily to create a completely new thing. At present, I have heard a lot of accusations about "stealing". In fact, many Americans may not understand how the United States itself came to this stage. From the history of human civilization, we are all learning from each other and making progress on the basis of what we have. In peacetime we will see more shared mutual learning, and then in times of conflict, people would like to explain what happened in another way, with more Cold War mentality.

Dr. Zhang:   确实如此，想想美国最初的崛起，工业革命时代，也曾经向世界的中心欧洲学习技术并在现有基础上进行改进。很多时候我们很有可能可以从历史中看到未来。非常有意思的是, Bloomberg news 3注意到一个文化细节。 就刘欣所佩戴的玉耳环延伸到一个文化信息。中国有句古话叫”宁为玉碎，不为瓦全”。有人解释说这代表了一个信号， 就是说中国宁愿不要贸易，也不想被侮辱。如果一定要对未来做一个预测，你觉得中美关系会怎样呢？

Think about it, when the United States first rose up during the industrial revolution, it also learned technology from the center of the world - Europe at that time. A lot of times we could tell the future from history. Interestingly enough, Bloomberg news3 noticed a cultural detail. The jade earrings worn by Liu Xin was extended to a cultural message. There is an old saying in China that "Better broke jade than intact tile." Some people have explained that this represents a signal that China prefers not to trade at all rather than to be humiliated. If you must make a prediction about the future, what do you think of Sino-US relations?

Tom:  未来是很难预测的。我只想说未来的10年应该不会很容易。 中国确实是一股力量，可以是一个强大的商业力量， 甚至是文化力量。我们看到很多不太发达国家送学生去中国学习。美国作为世界的领导要去面对中国，这是个问题。美国要如何应对中国，两国要如何相处，我不觉得双方已经很清楚，但必须要尽快搞清楚。 其实这个苗头从奥巴马就已经开始了，只是在川普期间变得更紧迫。是不是可以接受现实并且很智慧的来对待，这需要双方领导和智囊团的智慧。需要时间来接受和适应一个比较难接受的现实。大概不是通过一个电视对话就可以解决的问题。 而持续的相互的指责与对峙都对于解决问题没有太大的帮助。

The future is hard to predict. I just want to say that it won’t be easier the next 10 years. China is indeed a power, it can be a commercial power, even a cultural power. We have seen many less developed countries send students to study in China. All these seems to be a problem for the United States, as the world leader to deal with China. How the United States should deal with China and how the two countries should get along with each other, I don’t think the two sides are very clear, but they must be clear very soon. In fact, this started already during Obama administration, but it has become more intense during Trump administration. Whether it can handled wisely, it requires the wisdom of both sides’ leaders and their think tanks. It takes time to accept and adapt to a more difficult reality. Probably not a problem that can be solved through a TV conversation. The constant mutual accusation and confrontation are not very helpful in solving the problem.

Dr. Zhang: 确实，这种形式的电视对话应该是第一次。我们刚刚说到这可能不是一个很好的渠道加强彼此的了解，尤其在主持人有意要强化一些误解，并不助于双方真正对话的进行。同时我们也意识到其实在中国可能也有一群像Fox News观众群一样思维的群体。 那么什么样的形式才是最好的增强彼此了解的渠道呢？ 双方如果都要努力摒弃一些旧有的偏激看法，提倡和平，应该做些什么呢？

This form of TV conversation indeed was the first time. We just said that this may not be a good channel to enhance mutual understanding, especially if the host intends to reinforce some misunderstandings which does not help much with the dialogue between the two sides. At the same time, we also realize that in China there are counterparts of Fox News audience. So what kind of form is the best way to promote better mutual understanding? If both sides should work hard to abandon some stereotypes and promote peace, what should be done?

Tom: 在学术报告范围内是很难的，就是写再多的调研，也只能给学术人士看。 这些是接触不到普通人民的。 如果想让广大群众有很好的认识，大众传媒来说，商业频道太短，只是2秒的广告。如果真的想有一些更文明的辩论，可以考虑早间新闻，或者PBS和 NPR,因为这些频道的听众受教育程度要高一些，更开明，能接受其他想法。主持人也不会这样有对抗性，他们会更文明一些。除此外，应该有更多的个人与个人间的接触。我认为这方面这几年有些减弱。这其实在这种大环境下是要加强的。 当年我记得在北外有很好的交流。现在没有看到，觉得双方都更加隔离。我想用一个比较乐观的想法来结束我们的解析。我经历了很多也看到了中国和美国互相对抗的状态。 从尼克松开始中美关系有了很大的改观。你的父母那一代也一定会告诉你同样的情况。

Just staying in academia will not help. Research articles do not reach to the average people. TV Commercials are too short, just 2 seconds. If you really want to have some more civilized debates, consider US Morning News, or PBS and NPR, because the audiences on these channels are more educated, more open-minded, and able to accept other ideas. The host will not be so confrontational either and they will be more civilized. In addition, there should be more person-to-person contact which has weakened in recent years. I remember seeing a lot of that at BFSU when I worked there. I have not seen it now and feel that both sides are more isolated. I want to end our conversation on a positive note. I have experienced a lot and I have seen China and the United States were at each other. Since Nixon period, Sino-US relations have changed a lot.

Dr. Zhang: 希望在个人层面会有更多的交流。 亲眼去看，亲身去感受，抛除很多政治的因素，并且可以尽量客观和诚实地去理解所看所经历。其实任何一个真正去过中国的西方人，尤其是近20年，他们都会对中国有不同的理解。在中国也都会被非常礼貌地对待。Tom以及我的很多西方朋友还开玩笑说他们在中国都会被视为 “privileged minority”. 中国人民善良，勤劳，踏实和热情是绝对的主流。在国家层面，相信两国的领导人都具备全球视野，以世界和平为重，以大智慧来考量全局，促进双边与多边互惠互利。

I hope there will be more exchanges at the individual level. See it with your own eyes, feel it yourself, try to understand what you see as objectively as possible and be honest about it. In fact, any Westerner who has actually been to China, especially in the past 20 years, will have different understandings of China. They are treated very politely and friendly in China. Tom and many of my Western friends also joked that they are considered “privileged minority” in China. The Chinese people are kind, hardworking, down-to-earth and with great hospitality. At the national level, I believe that the leaders of both countries have a global vision, focus on world peace, consider the overall situation with great wisdom, and promote positive relationships bilaterally and multilaterally.

感谢Tom今天做客北美之声。 谢谢大家。 下次再见！