mix格式文件:请各位大侠帮忙翻译

A DUMBED DOWN AGENDA FOR LOCAL ELECTION COVERAGE?
In interviews, journalists reported their expectation that 2001 would be a difficult election to sell to their readers. Their editorial response was twofold. First, most confirmed that they were ‘happy to lighten it to keep the readers interested’. One time-tested journalistic strategy is to report quirky, amusing stories which nonetheless retain an electoral theme. In 1997, for example, a number of newspapers carried a story about a local butcher who was selling red (Labour), blue
(Conservative) and yellow (Liberal Democrat) sausages on election day (Franklin and Parry 1998: 217).
Analysis of newspaper contents in 2001 confirmed the increased emphasis on such gimmicky stories, with nearly a quarter (295 [24 per cent]) of published items coded as‘quirky’ or ‘amusing’ compared with 230 (19 per cent) in 1987; the increase is modest but clear. ‘Pick Up Your Party’, for example, an article on ‘Election Ales’, replaced sausages with beer and announced that a local supermarket was selling Red Flag Bitter, True Blue Bitter, Alliance Bitter and Nationalist Brew (Halifax Courier, 25th May, 2001).
The more sober, if bawdy, Morley Observer (31st May, 2001) celebrated ‘National Bottoms Week’ in a dumbed down editorial headlined ‘Bottoms Up For a Politician Free Week’. ‘We can’t help thinking that most people will be more than happy if we give politicians and the General Election a wide berth this week’, the Editor suggested, as he reported the findings of a national poll which revealed ‘that Tony Blair is generally regarded as having the best rear of the party leaders with William Hague, well, bottom. Charles Kennedy, as you would expect, occupies the middle ground’. A journalist on the same newspaper, argued, ‘We were really worried about overkill. So I think he tried to lighten it. . . It’s been hard work. We felt that people had just about had enough’.

A second, widely adopted, editorial strategy for engaging readers with the election involved publishing highly personalised candidate profiles which offered readers a human interest focus rather than any discussion of candidates’ policy commitments. An editor explained:
We decided for the poor readers’ sake that we were going to make the election as interesting as we could. So my suggestion was that we interview the candidates as people as well as politicians — get pictures of them at home with their family — and try to find out why they came into politics and what they hoped to achieve: rather than go on their policies.