来源：《洛杉矶时报》
原文刊登日期：2021年2月26日
Even as most awards shows drop in ratings, the Golden Globes, which recognizes work in film and television, remains hugely popular. But the credibility of the people behind the show only seems to decrease.
尽管大多数颁奖典礼的收视率都在下降，但认可电影和电视作品的金球奖仍然非常受欢迎。但是节目背后的人的可信度似乎在下降。
A Feb. 21 report outlined the past of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association. The organization denied allegations in 2011 that its members took gifts from studios and producers courting them for nominations and awards. But it has acknowledged a number of other practices that are questionable.
2月21日的一篇报道概述了好莱坞外国记者协会的过去。2011年，有指控声称HFPA成员从电影公司和制片人那里收受礼物，为提名和奖项提供便利，HFPA对此予以否认。但HFPA承认了其他一些值得怀疑的做法。
The tiny group of 87 members work for foreign media outlets. By contrast, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, which awards the Oscars, has about 9,300 voting members, all of whom are employed in the entertainment industry. And as media outlets have shrunk, so have the HFPA members’ opportunities to work.
这个由87名成员组成的小团体均就职于外国媒体机构。相比之下，奥斯卡颁奖机构美国电影艺术与科学学院有大约9300名投票成员，他们都受雇于娱乐业。随着媒体机构的萎缩，HFPA成员的工作机会也在减少。
HFPA, a nonprofit, earns much of its revenue from selling the broadcast rights to its awards show; its deal with NBC earned the HFPA $27 million last fiscal year. The money has funded tens of millions of dollars in philanthropic grants over the years to, among others, programs and educational institutions that help train and develop filmmakers, writers, designers and journalists. In 2020, the grants totaled about $5 million.
HFPA是一家非盈利机构，其大部分收入来自出售其颁奖典礼的转播权；上个财年，HFPA与美国全国广播公司(NBC)达成的协议为其赚了2700万美元。多年来，HFPA以慈善拨款的形式向各种项目和教育机构资助了数千万美元，用于培训和培养电影制作人、作家、设计师和记者等。2020年，拨款总额约为500万美元。
But it also spends a chunk of the money it collects from Hollywood on itself, and herein lies the credibility problem. It pays its members to sit on its numerous committees — it spent about $1.9 million that way in the fiscal year ending June 2020. Members insist they work hard on committees. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, on the other hand, pays none of its members to sit on committees.
但它也把从好莱坞收来的一大笔钱花在了自己身上，这就是公信力的问题。它向其成员支付在其众多委员会任职的费用——在截至2020年6月的财年中，它以这种方式花费了约190万美元。成员们坚称他们在委员会工作很努力。另一方面，美国电影艺术与科学学院不向其成员支付任何委员会任职的费用。
Granted, HFPA members are earning less from their work as writers and photographers as journalistic outlets across the globe cut back on staff and rarely have full-time entertainment reporters based in Los Angeles. Some members may be taking in more money from their committee work than from their journalism. Bottom line, they are using funds from Hollywood on themselves. That’s wasting journalistic integrity.
诚然，由于全球各地的新闻机构都在裁员，而且很少有全职娱乐记者常驻洛杉矶，HFPA成员作为作家和摄影师的收入正在减少。有些成员从他们的委员会工作中获得的收入可能比从他们的新闻工作中获得的收入更多。总之，他们把好莱坞的资金用在了自己身上。这是在浪费新闻诚信。
If necessary, the HFPA needs to hire more professional staff to do time-consuming committee work. Some members get involved, as part of the HFPA’s grants committee, with visiting school grantees, talking to students, and moderating panels for them. That’s great. They just shouldn’t be paid for it.
如有必要，HFPA需要聘请更多专业人员来做耗时的委员会工作。作为HFPA资助委员会的一员，一些成员参与访问学校，与学生交谈，并为学生主持小组讨论。这很好。但不应该为此向成员付钱。
The HFPA pays members’ airfare when they fly to interview people or visit sets, but it allows studios to pay for hotel rooms and dinners. Letting studios cover those bills presents a clear conflict of interest and breaks a doctrine of responsible journalistic outlets. But it’s still a problem when the HFPA picks up members’ journalistic expenses.
当HFPA成员飞往采访人或参观片场时，HFPA会支付他们的机票，但允许电影公司支付酒店房间和晚餐费用。让电影公司承担这些费用会带来明显的利益冲突，并打破了负责任的新闻媒体的信条。但即使HFPA承担成员的新闻费用，这仍然是有问题的。
The HFPA is never going to correct the bad optics of being a journalists’ organization that gets paid by a TV network to put on a show that gives awards to movies and TV shows. But it could make a lot of changes that would help make it more credible.
HFPA永远不会纠正人们对它的不良印象，即它是一个由电视网络支付报酬、为电影和电视节目颁奖的记者组织。但它可以做出很多改变，使其更可信。