1、考研英语（阅读）模拟试卷 304 及答案与解析Part ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)0 An old saying has it that half of all advertising budgets are wastedthe trouble is, no one knows which half. In the internet age, at least in theory, th
2、is fraction can be much reduced. By watching what people search for, click on and say online, companies can aim “behavioral“ ads at those most likely to buy.In the past couple of weeks a quarrel has illustrated the value to advertisers of such fin e-grained information: should advertisers assume tha
3、t people are happy to be tracked and sent behavioral ads? Or should they have explicit permission?In December 2010 America s Federal Trade Commission(FTC)proposed adding a “do not track“(DNT)option to internet browsers, so that users could tell advertisers that they did not want to be followed. Micr
4、osoft s Internet Explorer and Apple s Safari both offer DNT; Google s Chrome is due to do so this year. In February the FTC and Digital Advertising Alliance(DAA)agreed that the industry would get cracking on responding to DNT requests.On May 31st Microsoft set off the row: It said that Internet Expl
5、orer 10, the version due to appear in Windows 8, would have DNT as a default.Advertisers are horrified. Human nature being what it is, most people stick with default settings. Few switch DNT on now, but if tracking is off it will stay off. Bob Liodice, the chief executive of the Association of Natio
6、nal Advertisers, one of the groups in the DAA, says consumers will be worse off if the industry cannot collect information about their preferences. “People will not get fewer ads,“ he says. “They 11 get less meaningful, less targeted ads.“It is not yet clear how advertisers will respond. Getting a D
7、NT signal does not oblige anyone to stop tracking, although some companies have promised to do so. Unable to tell whether someone really objects to behavioral ads or whether they are sticking with Microsoft s default, some may ignore a DNT signal and press on anyway.Also unclear is why Microsoft has
8、 gone it alone. After all, it has an ad business too, which it says will comply with DNT requests, though it is still working out how. If it is trying to upset Google, which relies almost wholly on advertising,it has chosen an indirect method:there is no guarantee that DNT by default will become the
9、 norm. DNT does not seem an obviously huge selling point for Windows 8though the firm has compared some of its other products favorably with Googles on that count before. Brendon Lynch, Microsofts chief privacy officer, blogged: “we believe consumers should have more control.“ Could it really be tha
10、t simple?1 It is suggested in Paragraph 1 that “behavioral“ ads help advertisers to（A）ease competition among themselves.（B） lower their operational costs.（C） avoid complaints from consumers.（D）provide better online services.2 “The industry“(Para. 3)refers to（A）online advertisers.（B） e-commerce condu
11、ctors.（C） digital information analysis.（D）internet browser developers.3 Bob Liodice holds that setting DNT as a default（A）many cut the number of junk ads.（B） fails to affect the ad industry.（C） will not benefit consumers.（D）goes against human nature.4 Which of the following is true according to Para
12、graph 6?（A）DNT may not serve its intended purpose.（B） Advertisers are willing to implement DNT.（C） DNT is losing its popularity among consumers.（D）Advertisers are obliged to offer behavioral ads.5 The author s attitude towards what Brendon Lynch said in his blog is one of（A）indulgence.（B） understand
13、ing.（C） appreciation.（D）skepticism.5 Bankers have been blaming themselves for their troubles in public. Behind the scenes, they have been taking aim at someone else: the accounting standard-setters. Their rales, moan the banks, have forced them to report enormous losses, and it s just not fair. Thes
14、e rules say they must value some assets at the price a third party would pay, not the price managers and regulators would like them to fetch.Unfortunately, banks lobbying now seems to be working. The details may be unknowable, but the independence of standard-setters, essential to the proper functio
15、ning of capital markets, is being compromised. And, unless banks carry toxic assets at prices that attract buyers, reviving the banking system will be difficult.After a bruising encounter with Congress, Americas Financial Accounting Standards Board(FASB)rushed through rule changes. These gave banks
16、more freedom to use models to value illiquid assets and more flexibility in recognizing losses on long-term assets in their income statement. Bob Herz, the FASB s chairman, cried out against those who “question our motives.“ Yet bank shares rose and the changes enhance what one lobby group politely
17、calls “the use of judgment by management.“European ministers instantly demanded that the International Accounting Standards Board(IASB)do likewise. The IASB says it does not want to act without overall planning, but the pressure to fold when it completes its reconstruction of rules later this year i
18、s strong. Charlie McCreevy, a European commissioner, warned the IASB that it did “not live in a political vacuum“ but “in the real world“ and that Europe could yet develop different rules.It was banks that were on the wrong planet, with accounts that vastly overvalued assets. Today they argue that m
19、arket prices overstate losses, because they largely reflect the temporary illiquidity of markets, not the likely extent of bad debts. The truth will not be known for years. But banks shares trade below their book value, suggesting that investors are skeptical. And dead markets partly reflect the par
20、alysis of banks which will not sell assets for fear of booking losses, yet are reluctant to buy all those supposed bargains.To get the system working again, losses must be recognized and dealt with. Americas new plan to buy up toxic assets will not work unless banks mark assets to levels which buyer
21、s find attractive. Successful markets require independent and even combative standard-setters. The FASB and IASB have been exactly that, cleaning up rules on stock options and pensions, for example, against hostility from special interests. But by giving in to critics now they are inviting pressure
22、to make more concessions.6 Bankers complained that they were forced to（A）follow unfavorable asset evaluation rules.（B） collect payments from third parties.（C） cooperate with the price managers.（D）reevaluate some of their assets.7 According to the author, the rule changes of the FASB may result in（A）
23、the diminishing role of management.（B） the revival of the banking system.（C） the banks long-term asset losses.（D）the weakening of its independence.8 According to Paragraph 4, McCreevy objects to the IASB s attempt to（A）keep away from political influences.（B） evade the pressure from their peers.（C） a
24、ct on their own in rule-setting.（D）take gradual measures in reform.9 The author thinks the banks were “on the wrong planet“ in that they（A）misinterpreted market price indicators.（B） exaggerated the real value of their assets.（C） neglected the likely existence of bad debts.（D）denied booking losses in
25、 their sale of assets.10 The authors attitude towards standard-setters is one of（A）satisfaction.（B） skepticism.（C） objectiveness.（D）sympathy.10 In recent years, railroads have been combining with each other, merging into super systems, causing heightened concerns about monopoly. As recently as 1995,
26、 the top four railroads accounted for under 70 percent of the total ton-miles moved by rails. Next year, after a series of mergers is completed, just four railroads will control well over 90 percent of all the freight moved by major rail carriers.Supporters of the new super systems argue that these
27、mergers will allow for substantial cost reductions and better coordinated service. Any threat of monopoly, they argue, is removed by fierce competition from trucks. But many shippers complain that for heavy bulk commodities traveling long distances, such as coal, chemicals, and grain, trucking is to
28、o costly and the railroads therefore have them by the throat.The vast consolidation within the rail industry means that most shippers are served by only one rail company. Railroads typically charge such “captive“ shippers 20 to 30 percent more than they do when another railroad is competing for the
29、business. Shippers who feel they are being overcharged have the right to appeal to the federal governments Surface Transportation Board for rate relief, but the process is expensive, time consuming, and will work only in truly extreme cases.Railroads justify rate discrimination against captive shipp
30、ers on the grounds that in the long run it reduces everyone s cost. If railroads charged all customers the same average rate, they argue, shippers who have the option of switching to trucks or other forms of transportation would do so, leaving remaining customers to shoulder the cost of keeping up t
31、he line. Its a theory to which many economists subscribe, but in practice it often leaves railroads in the position of determining which companies will flourish and which will fail. “Do we really want railroads to be the arbiters of who wins and who loses in the marketplace?“ asks Martin Bercovici,
32、a Washington lawyer who frequently represents shipper.Many captive shippers also worry they will soon be hit with a round of huge rate increases. The railroad industry as a whole, despite its brightening fortunes, still does not earn enough to cover the cost of the capital it must invest to keep up
33、with its surging traffic. Yet railroads continue to borrow billions to acquire one another, with Wall Street cheering them on. Consider the $10.2 billion bid by Norfolk Southern and CSX to acquire Conrail this year. Conrails net railway operating income in 1996 was just $427 million, less than half
34、of the carrying costs of the transaction. Whos going to pay for the rest of the bill? Many captive shippers fear that they will, as Norfolk Southern and CSX increase their grip on the market.11 According to those who support mergers, railway monopoly is unlikely because（A）cost reduction is based on
35、competition.（B） services call for cross-trade coordination.（C） outside competitors will continue to exist.（D）shippers will have the railway by the throat.12 What is many captive shippers attitude towards the consolidation in the rail industry?（A）Indifferent.（B） Supportive.（C） Indignant.（D）Apprehensi
36、ve.13 It can be inferred from Paragraph 3 that（A）shippers will be charged less without a rival railroad.（B） there will soon be only one railroad company nationwide.（C） overcharged shippers are unlikely to appeal for rate relief.（D）a government board ensures fair play in railway business.14 The word
37、“arbiters“(Para. 4)most probably refers to those（A）who work as coordinators.（B） who function as judges.（C） who supervise transactions.（D）who determine the price.15 According to the text, the cost increase in the rail industry is mainly caused by（A）the continuing acquisition.（B） the growing traffic.（
38、C） the cheering Wall Street.（D）the shrinking market.15 Ruth Simmons joined Goldman Sachss board as an outside director in January 2000; a year later she became president of Brown University. For the rest of the decade she apparently managed both roles without attracting much criticism. But by the en
39、d of 2009 Ms. Simmons was under fire for having sat on Goldman s compensation committee; how could she have let those enormous bonus payouts pass unremarked? By February the next year Ms. Simmons had left the board. The position was just taking up too much time, she said.Outside directors are suppos
40、ed to serve as helpful, yet less biased, advisers on a firms board. Having made their wealth and their reputations elsewhere, they presumably have enough independence to disagree with the chief executive s proposals. If the sky, and the share price, is falling, outside directors should be able to gi
41、ve advice based on having weathered their own crises.The researchers from Ohio University used a database that covered more than 10,000 firms and more than 64,000 different directors between 1989 and 2004. Then they simply checked which directors stayed from one proxy statement to the next. The most
42、 likely reason for departing a board was age, so the researchers concentrated on those “surprise“ disappearances by directors under the age of 70. They found that after a surprise departure, the probability that the company will subsequently have to restate earnings increases by nearly 20%. The like
43、lihood of being named in a federal class-action lawsuit also increases, and the stock is likely to perform worse. The effect tended to be larger for larger firms. Although a correlation between them leaving and subsequent bad performance at the firm is suggestive, it does not mean that such director
44、s are always jumping off a sinking ship. Often they “trade up“, leaving riskier, smaller firms for larger and more stable firms.But the researchers believe that outside directors have an easier time of avoiding a blow to their reputations if they leave a firm before bad news breaks, even if a review
45、 of history shows they were on the board at the time any wrongdoing occurred. Firms who want to keep their outside directors through tough times may have to create incentives. Otherwise outside directors will follow the example of Ms. Simmons, once again very popular on campus.16 According to Paragr
46、aph 1, Ms. Simmons was criticized for（A）gaining excessive profits.（B） failing to fulfill her duty.（C） refusing to make compromises.（D）leaving the board in tough times.17 We learn from Paragraph 2 that outside directors are supposed to be（A）generous investors.（B） unbiased executives.（C） share price f
47、orecasters.（D）independent advisers.18 According to the researchers from Ohio University, after an outside directors surprise departure, the firm is likely to（A）become more stable.（B） report increased earnings.（C） do less well in the stock market.（D）perform worse in lawsuits.19 It can be inferred fro
48、m the last paragraph that outside directors（A）may stay for the attractive offers from the firm.（B） have often had records of wrongdoings in the firm.（C） are accustomed to stress-free work in the firm.（D）will decline incentives from the firm.20 The author s attitude toward the role of outside directo
49、rs is（A）permissive.（B） positive.（C） scornful.（D）critical.考研英语（阅读）模拟试卷 304 答案与解析Part ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)【知识模块】 阅读1 【正确答案】 B【试题解析】 推断题。根据题干定位到第一段。此段大意为，在互联网时代，有一半的广告预算可以大大缩减，因为企业可以通过观察人们的搜索、点击内容等，使得广告更有针对性，从而降低预算成本，即 B 项“降低运作成本”为正确答案。A 项“减轻广告商之间的竞争”、C 项“避免消费者的抱怨”、D 项“提供更好的网上服务”，原文均未提及。【知识模块】 阅读2 【正确答案】 D【试题解析】 含义题。the industry 在第三段，指代前面出现过的内容，而前面提到的 Microsoft InternetExplorer、Apples Safair 和 Googles Chrome 都是 D 项中的“internet browser developers( 浏览器开发商)”。A 项
