上周無意中看過某電視台派記者往歐洲，預告歐洲國家盃賽前的點滴，我在此要先讚其資料搜尋做得好好，既有動感亦令到觀眾有興趣，但令我感到眼前一亮的是女主持依雯，活潑親切卻不低俗。
廿多年來看過不少電視台為吸引年青觀眾，在大型體育節目起用年輕女主持，個人覺得這些年輕的花瓶實有其存在價值，但編導監製以至她們自己如何為角色定位，就是一個大學問。最大忌的就是將她們塑造為專家，因為她們就算如何刨波、刨馬、刨體育，都距離真正專家水準甚遠，令唔識的人笑死，識的人嚇死，最慘的就是與她們合作的真正專家，唔知點同佢兜。
因為潮流之關係，將她們塑造成每事問，其實這也無不妥，但是如果問題過於低智，一來影響她們形象，二來有損節目專業性。
我覺得依雯是近二十年來火喉最恰當的大型球賽花瓶，說話清晰，笑容親切，談吐恰其年齡，而電視台目前替她定位定得好之餘，且看直播時如何替她安排角色，可造之材，真係唔好浪費。
You are absolutely correct. By supporting a lot (as much as possible)
One can ascertain that one will achieve some kind of relative response depending on how co incidental the responsive data is to the attention. If the optimal supportive motivation is relative to the foundation (wether valid or not) a supportive return will follow.
Accuracy is the issue. This is an hypothetical deduction (not quite as comprehensive as educational requirements are about here in North America) but by any of the individuals motive intelligence. Linguistics and vocabulary play the most important part of communication. Gaps of data in verbal communication only provide confusion.
To express anything at all one must work untill one can say what one means in its entirety otherwise one will express a peer groups distrust and desire to avoid the issue. The bottom line is to study practical, basic, fundemental, primary, ground level technicalities of domestic level to know for sure one is known for sure and this aspect goes far and beyond the experience of the
marriage relationship which is considered by most the most complete education for the poor. From your good friend Bruce K. Paxton
