单选题 Whatever happened to the death of newspapers? A year ago the end seemed near. The recession threatened to remove the advertising and readers that had not already fled to the Internet. Newspapers like the San Francisco Chronicle were chronicling their own doom. America's Federal Trade Commission launched talks about how to save newspapers. Should they become charitable corporations? Should the state subsidise (补贴) them? It will hold another meeting soon. But the discussions now seem out of date.
In much of the world there is little sign of crisis. German and Brazilian papers shrugged off the recession. Even American newspapers, which inhabit the most troubled comer of the global industry, have not only survived but often returned to profit. Not the 20% profit margins that were routine a few years ago, but profit all the same.
It has not been much fun. Many papers stayed out of debt or difficulties by laying journalists off. The American Society of News Editors reckons that 13,500 newsroom jobs have gone since 2007. Readers are paying more for slimmer products. Some papers even had the nerve to refuse delivery to distant suburbs. Yet these desperate measures have proved the right ones and, sadly for many journalists, they can be pushed further.
Newspapers are becoming more balanced businesses, with a healthier mix of revenues from readers and advertisers. American papers have long been highly unusual in their reliance on ads. Fully 87% of their revenues came from advertising in 2008, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD). In Japan the proportion is 35%. Not surprisingly, Japanese newspapers are much more stable.
The whirlwind that swept through newsrooms harmed everybody, but much of the damage has been concentrated in areas where newspapers are least distinctive. Car and film reviewers have gone. So have science and general business reporters. Foreign bureaus have been savagely cut off. Newspapers are less complete as a result. But completeness is no longer a virtue in the newspaper business.
It is grim to forecast still more writers losing their jobs. But whether newspapers are thrown onto doorsteps or distributed digitally, they need to deliver something that is distinctive. New technologies like Apple's iPad only make this more true. The mere acquisition of a smooth block of metal and glass does not magically persuade people that they should start paying for news. They will pay for news if they think it has value. Newspapers need to focus relentlessly (持续地) on that.

单选题 By saying 'Newspapers like.., their own doom' (Line 3, Para. 1), the author indicates that newspapers ______.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】根据题干将本题出处定位于第1段第4句。第1段第4句提到，像《旧金山纪事报》这样的报纸正在记录着他们自己的厄运(doom)。结合开篇提到的the death of newspapers(报纸的灭亡)，the end和后一句中提到的how to save newspapers(如何拯救报业)可推断出，“报纸正在记录着他们自己的厄运”指的其实是报业正面临灭亡的危险。A、B和D均与该段描述的报业的状况不符合。

单选题 Some newspapers refused delivery to distant suburbs probably because ______.

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】根据题干中的refused delivery to distant suburbs将本题出处定位于第3段倒数第二句。题干是对第3段倒数第二句的信息复现，原因可以从上下文中寻找。前面提到，报纸裁员，读者正为更薄的新闻产品支付更多的钱。很显然，这些都是报业为了节约成本而采取的措施。定位处使用even强调有的报纸拒绝向边远郊区投递也是为了减少开支(reduce costs)，have the nerve to意为“胆敢，有勇气”。A和D是对readers are paying more for slimmer products的错误理解；C的信息在文中未提到。

单选题 Why are Japanese newspapers much more stable, compared with their American counterparts?

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】根据题干中的Japanese newspapers和Ametican counterparts将本题出处定位于第4段第2至5句。第4段第2至5句提到，美国报业长久以来异乎寻常地依靠广告生存。据经合组织所言，2008年美国报业足足有87%的收益来自广告。而在日本这一比例为35%，因此日本报业稳定得多就不足为奇了。由此可知，日本报业稳定的原因是其依赖广告的程度小(less dependent on advertising)。文中未提到A、B和C三项是日本报业稳定的原因，故排除。

单选题 What can be inferred from the last two paragraphs about the current newspaper business?

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】根据题干中的the last two paragraphs将本题出处定位于第5、6段。第5段第1句提到，横扫新闻编辑室的旋风伤及每个人，但造成的损害大都集中在报纸最没有特色(least distinctive)的地方。第6段第2句又提到，不管报纸是被置于门阶上还是通过电子渠道分发，它们都需要发表一些有特色的东西(something that is distinctive)。这两段从正反两个方面指出，特色(distinctiveness)对报纸的重要性。B是对第5段最后两句的错误理解；C是对第5段第4句中的“驻外办事处被无情地裁掉”的过度推测；D是对第5段第2句中的“汽车和电影评论员不存在了”的过度推断。