论文部分内容阅读
china’s third biggest lottery prize in history was claimed on october 13. the winner， a masked man who refused to reveal his identity， took home 520 million yuan （$85 million） from a welfare lottery issuing center in taiyuan， shanxi Province. it triggered a nationwide debate with many questioning the fairness of the transaction.
According to the lottery Administration Regulations enacted by the state council in 2009， “the winner’s personal information should be kept confidential.” But there is always controversy over whether the information should be made public.
those supporting disclosure cite examples in the united states. and other western countries where the information is public domain. they say the right to privacy must best aside to maintain transparency in the handling of public money. otherwise， the credibility of the whole lottery industry will come under a cloud. But others believe huge jackpot winners have the right to privacy， especially as they could be in danger from law breakers.
PRO
Feng Qingyang www.voc.com.cn
A winner should not have excessive privacy. When public interests are concerned， privacy rights become curtailed. I believe that most winners would prefer to keep their names secret and not want to have their peaceful lives disrupted after winning a jackpot. However， since the lottery is a charity concerning public welfare， the public have the right to know about the entire operation as well as the identity of the winner. The amount raised and the uses of the fund must be transparent and fair； otherwise， it will provide an opportunity for under-thecounter transactions.
COn
o Lin Yangcheng Evening News
Some say the lottery industry’s credibility is very poor， so they need to prove their trustworthiness by disclosing the winner’s identity - a demand based on blind suspicion. Indeed， many scandals have occurred in the lottery industry but that does not necessarily indicate there was foul play in this particularse， and it’s unfair to have this winner pay the price for the industry’s poor credibility. Peoplen ask for improving the procedure and fixing regulatory loopholes， but theynnot simply shift suspicion to onese and require proof of trustworthiness in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.
Even if the winner discloses his or her identity， itn hardly prevent cheating. If someone is determined to cheat， he or she would definitely do it after planning scrupulously and making arrangements. If people have no trust in the system at all， making the winner’s identity public is not enough. PRO
Chen Guangjiang Yanzhao Evening News
There has long been a clamor for disclosing the identity of prize winners but the end result is always disappointing. If the information continues to be firmly hidden and people see no hope of disclosure， the public’s right to know and supervise will exist in name only. The lottery industry will lose its foundation and the lottery administration authority its credibility.
COn
Hong Yang Yangcheng Evening News
I’m afraid that those asking for disclosing the winner’s identity have never looked at the issue through the winner’s lens. If you win a huge jackpot some day， would you want to disclose your identity？ Yes， we have seen a lot of pictures in the media showing the happy faces of lottery winners from other countries. Some U.S. states require that the winner’s identity be made public. But what we did not realize is the fact that many were forced to relocate and some were even killed after appearing in public.
Even in the United States where there is a sound security system， the winner’s life and personal safetynnot be guaranteed completely， let alone in China， a country with different conditions. Given that， what kind of trouble will a prize winner confront？ Even without other dangers， they will have to deal with relatives and friends who keep coming to borrow money.
PRO
Liu Yuanju Southern Metropolis Daily
Those opposing information openness say that in a society with little personal space and complicated interpersonal relations， winning could bring endless trouble to the winner， who is likely to remain under huge pressure for the rest of his or her life. But the Chinese society is not the only place where social exchange exists. We have seen prize winners in other countries facing the same problems. Still in those countries identity disclosure is a must. So obviously， maintaining an open and transparent system is more important.
COn
Han Han The Beijing News
A jackpot is undeniably a collection of public money but it is ridiculous to make that the reason for disclosing the winner’s identity. By this logic， if someone runs a neighborhood store， the residents will have the right to ask him to disclose his earnings since “what he has earned is from everyone’s pocket.”
Similarly， the principle of government information disclosure doesn’t rationalize identity disclosure. The winner’s identity is government information， but not all government information has to be made public， especially when a citizen’s privacy is concerned. For example， the identity of a corruption and malpractice whistleblower must be held in strict confidence.
Of course， if statutory bodies find sufficient evidence to prove the winner has cheated， his identity must be disclosed since privacy rights must yield to the public’s right to know when the former encroaches upon the interests of others. However， if there is no conclusive evidence， merely speculation， depriving others of the right to privacy in the name of “public interests” is the “tyranny of the majority.”
PRO
Yuan Yiwen The Beijing News
A lottery isn’t a private transaction entailing the right to privacy. Instead， it is a government monopoly， collecting money from people by selling tickets and then taking a portion of it to distribute as prizes to individuals. The prize money by nature is public property， so of course the public has the right to know where it goes. What the winner takes is the public’s money， and on the basis of transparency in public property， his privacy rights must yield to disclosure of identity.
According to the lottery Administration Regulations enacted by the state council in 2009， “the winner’s personal information should be kept confidential.” But there is always controversy over whether the information should be made public.
those supporting disclosure cite examples in the united states. and other western countries where the information is public domain. they say the right to privacy must best aside to maintain transparency in the handling of public money. otherwise， the credibility of the whole lottery industry will come under a cloud. But others believe huge jackpot winners have the right to privacy， especially as they could be in danger from law breakers.
PRO
Feng Qingyang www.voc.com.cn
A winner should not have excessive privacy. When public interests are concerned， privacy rights become curtailed. I believe that most winners would prefer to keep their names secret and not want to have their peaceful lives disrupted after winning a jackpot. However， since the lottery is a charity concerning public welfare， the public have the right to know about the entire operation as well as the identity of the winner. The amount raised and the uses of the fund must be transparent and fair； otherwise， it will provide an opportunity for under-thecounter transactions.
COn
o Lin Yangcheng Evening News
Some say the lottery industry’s credibility is very poor， so they need to prove their trustworthiness by disclosing the winner’s identity - a demand based on blind suspicion. Indeed， many scandals have occurred in the lottery industry but that does not necessarily indicate there was foul play in this particularse， and it’s unfair to have this winner pay the price for the industry’s poor credibility. Peoplen ask for improving the procedure and fixing regulatory loopholes， but theynnot simply shift suspicion to onese and require proof of trustworthiness in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.
Even if the winner discloses his or her identity， itn hardly prevent cheating. If someone is determined to cheat， he or she would definitely do it after planning scrupulously and making arrangements. If people have no trust in the system at all， making the winner’s identity public is not enough. PRO
Chen Guangjiang Yanzhao Evening News
There has long been a clamor for disclosing the identity of prize winners but the end result is always disappointing. If the information continues to be firmly hidden and people see no hope of disclosure， the public’s right to know and supervise will exist in name only. The lottery industry will lose its foundation and the lottery administration authority its credibility.
COn
Hong Yang Yangcheng Evening News
I’m afraid that those asking for disclosing the winner’s identity have never looked at the issue through the winner’s lens. If you win a huge jackpot some day， would you want to disclose your identity？ Yes， we have seen a lot of pictures in the media showing the happy faces of lottery winners from other countries. Some U.S. states require that the winner’s identity be made public. But what we did not realize is the fact that many were forced to relocate and some were even killed after appearing in public.
Even in the United States where there is a sound security system， the winner’s life and personal safetynnot be guaranteed completely， let alone in China， a country with different conditions. Given that， what kind of trouble will a prize winner confront？ Even without other dangers， they will have to deal with relatives and friends who keep coming to borrow money.
PRO
Liu Yuanju Southern Metropolis Daily
Those opposing information openness say that in a society with little personal space and complicated interpersonal relations， winning could bring endless trouble to the winner， who is likely to remain under huge pressure for the rest of his or her life. But the Chinese society is not the only place where social exchange exists. We have seen prize winners in other countries facing the same problems. Still in those countries identity disclosure is a must. So obviously， maintaining an open and transparent system is more important.
COn
Han Han The Beijing News
A jackpot is undeniably a collection of public money but it is ridiculous to make that the reason for disclosing the winner’s identity. By this logic， if someone runs a neighborhood store， the residents will have the right to ask him to disclose his earnings since “what he has earned is from everyone’s pocket.”
Similarly， the principle of government information disclosure doesn’t rationalize identity disclosure. The winner’s identity is government information， but not all government information has to be made public， especially when a citizen’s privacy is concerned. For example， the identity of a corruption and malpractice whistleblower must be held in strict confidence.
Of course， if statutory bodies find sufficient evidence to prove the winner has cheated， his identity must be disclosed since privacy rights must yield to the public’s right to know when the former encroaches upon the interests of others. However， if there is no conclusive evidence， merely speculation， depriving others of the right to privacy in the name of “public interests” is the “tyranny of the majority.”
PRO
Yuan Yiwen The Beijing News
A lottery isn’t a private transaction entailing the right to privacy. Instead， it is a government monopoly， collecting money from people by selling tickets and then taking a portion of it to distribute as prizes to individuals. The prize money by nature is public property， so of course the public has the right to know where it goes. What the winner takes is the public’s money， and on the basis of transparency in public property， his privacy rights must yield to disclosure of identity.