The Women's Institute is urging supermarkets to do more to help consumers reduce their home food waste, after a survey of its own membership showed widespread confusion about “best before” and “use by” labeling(标签) on packaging.

    Its new analysis of products on supermarket shelves found that “once-opened” instructions were often contradictory and often failed to make clear whether they were a guide to food safety or quality. Only 45% of 5,000 WI members surveyed understood that best-before dates were a sign of food quality, while 26% did not understand that the more important use-by dates were a decisive guide to food safety.

    In its report on food waste, the WI said supermarkets were “potentially contributing to home food waste by leading customers to buy more food than they need, and giving conflicting and confusing on-pack information that leaves customers unsure about how long a product remains safe to eat in the home setting”. The 42-page report is part of the WI's ongoing campaign to reduce food waste. To underline the point about conflicting information, it cites(引用) a can of Sainsbury's own-brand sweetcorn advising consumers to eat it within one day of opening, while a similar tin from Waitrose gave consumers two days to finish it. Green Giant sweetcorn, however, has no specified date for eating once opened.

    Marylyn Haines Evans, chair of the Women's Institute's public affairs said: “WI members are some of the more informed members of society about food and cookery, but they are still confused about food labelling and 'once-opened' information. So we would like supermarkets to extend the amount of time that consumers have to use a product in their homes by making all of their once-opened instructions on product packaging consistent, and completely remove once-opened instructions on products where food safety is not an issue.”

    Today is National Bike-to-Work Day. And on New York City's jammed streets, people are cycling on hundreds of miles of new bike lanes. But New York's widespread efforts to make streets safer for bikes have also left some locals complaining about the loss of parking spots and lanes for cars.

    When the weather is good, Aaron Naparstek likes to pedal（用踏板踩） his two young kids to school on a special Dutch-made bicycle. Naparstek supports the new lane.

    Aaron: The bike lane on Prospect Park West is really introducing a lot of new people to the idea that it's possible to use a bike in New York City for transportation or to travel around. This is what 21^st century New York City looks like.

    Prospect Park West is still a one-way road, but where it used to have three lanes of car traffic, now it has two, plus a protected bike lane. Supporters say that makes the road safer for everyone, including pedestrians, by slowing down cars and taking bikes off the sidewalk. But some longtime residents disagree. Lois Carswell is president of a group called Seniors for Safety. She says the two-way bike lane is dangerous to older residents who are used to one-way traffic.

    Lois: We wanted a lane — the right kind of lane that would keep everybody safe, that would keep the bikers safe. But we want it to be done the right way. And it has not been done the right way.

    Craig Palmer builds bars and restaurants in Manhattan. I was interviewing him for a different story when he brought up the bike lanes all on his own.

    Craig: I think the biggest problem is that Bloomberg put all these bike lanes in. You took what used to be a full street and you're shrinking it.

    Then there are the Hasidic Jews in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, who forced the city to remove a bike lane through their neighborhood. But polls show that the majority of New Yorkers support bike lanes by a margin of 56% to 39%. Bicycle advocate Caroline Samponaro of Transportation Alternatives calls that a mandate.

    Caroline: If this was an election, we would have already had our victory. The public has spoken and they keep speaking. And I think, more importantly, the public is starting to vote with their pedals.

    When I was eight or nine years old, I wrote my first poem.

My mother read the little poem and began to cry. "Buddy, you didn't really write this beautiful, beautiful poem!" Shyly, I said that I had. My mother poured out her welcome praise. Why, this poem was nothing short of genius!

What time will Father be home?" I asked. I could hardly wait to show him what I had accomplished. My mother said she hoped he would be home around 7. I spent the best part of that afternoon preparing for his arrival. First, I wrote the poem out in my finest handwriting. Then I used colored pens to draw a border around it. Then I confidently placed it right on my father's plate on the dining table. But my father did not return at 7, Seven-fifteen, Seven-thirty. My father had begun his motion-picture career as a writer. He would be able to appreciate my poem even more than my mother.

    It was almost 8 o'clock when my father burst in. He was an hour late, but he could not sit down. I can see him now, a big Havana cigar in one hand, the rapidly disappearing drink in the other, calling down bitter words on his employees.

    Suddenly, he paused and glared at his plate. There was a silence. He was reaching for my poem. I lowered my head and stared down into my plate.

"What is this?" I heard him say.

"Ben, a wonderful thing has happened," my mother said. "Buddy has written his first poem. And it's beautiful, absolutely amazing".

"If you don't mind, I'd like to decide that for myself," Father said.

I kept my face lowered to my plate. It was only 10 lines long. But it seemed to take hours. I remember wondering why it was taking so long. I could hear him dropping the poem back on the table again. Now was the moment of decision.

"I think it's bad," my father said.

    I couldn't look up. My eyes were getting wet.

"Ben, sometimes I don't understand you," my mother was saying. "This is just a little boy. You're not in your studio now. These are the first lines of poetry he's ever written. He need encouragement."

"I don't know why," my father held his ground. "Isn't there enough bad poetry in the world already? No law says Buddy has to become a poet."

    I couldn't stand it another second. I ran from the dining room, threw myself on the bed and cried.

    That may have been the end of the anecdote(轶事) — but not of its significance for me.

    A few years later I took a second look at that first poem, and unwillingly I had to agree with my father's tough judgment. It was a pretty bad poem. After a while, I worked up the courage to show him something new, a short story. My father thought it was overwritten but not hopeless. I was learning to rewrite. And my mother was learning that she could disapprove of me without ruining me. You might say we were all learning. I was going on 12.

As I worked my way into other books and plays and films, it became clearer and clearer to me how fortunate I had been to have had a mother who said, "Buddy, it's wonderful!" and a father who shook his head no and drove me to tears with his, "I think it's bad." In fact all of us in life need that mother force, the loving force from which all creation flows; and yet the mother force alone is incomplete, even misleading, finally damaging, without the father force to caution, "Watch. Listen. Review. Improve." Between the two poles of affirmation (肯定) and doubt, both in the name of love, I try to follow my true course.

    Have you ever felt like you are not given the kind of respect you deserve? In one way or another, all of us have felt this way. We've yearned(渴望) to be looked at as an authority, someone people look up to and trust. We're not taught in school how to do this and our parents didn't tell us the secret on how to establish our authority. It's something we learn and gain by ourselves. And the answer is as simple as changing our mindset. What? No way! Oh but it is. People tend to underestimate the power of the mind. Change your game by changing your mind.

    Take time to look back and think about people in your life who are an authority or a leader at work, who has more credibility(可信度) than you or who you look up to and inspires you. They are up there not for the reasons you think. If you really think about it, they aren't the smartest of the bunch, not the most educated, and neither are they the best. And in no way do they even call themselves an expert. Instead, they are up there because they are great teachers and advocates(支持者) for the success of their customers or employees.

    Let's take Richard Simmons for example. This famous fitness personality has been a household name ever since he started gaining popularity during the first few years of his career. Stop and think, though, do you really think he is the best person to really get people into shape? Is he the Einstein of fitness and nutrition? Or does he even call himself a master of his craft? Of course not. People look up to him and give him authority because he is a great educator. Instead of sharing information that's far too complicated to understand, he figures out what your problems are and finds out a way to fix them. He even has social media that he updates on a regular basis with topics that are helpful and easy to understand for his fans and followers.

    Depending on the field you're in, you can share with people things you know and that you think they will want to know as well. If you're a nurse, for example, you can make a blog post for common health problems and quick remedies(治疗方法) people can do at home. Remember, the simpler you can make it, the better. People will trust you completely if you give them easy solutions. Like Richard, you'll soon be the expert you'll want to listen to. You can be an advocate also by showing people that you have their best interests at heart. You can also start up conferences to take up people's concerns and try to deal with them the best way that you can.

    So, how will you be viewed as an authority? Make that mind shift. Find out what concerns and troubles your target. Give solutions. Show that you care. And help them climb up that ladder of success. Ladies and gentlemen, that's how it's done.

    The Lumière Brothers had their film shows, taken over 100 years ago, to 100 paying customers on December 8, 1985. One of their earliest films was a 30-second piece which showed a section of a railway platform. As the train approached, panic started in the theatre: people jumped and ran away. In their confusion, the audiences feared that a real train was about to crush them. That was the moment when cinema was born.

    Early cinema audiences often experienced the same confusion. In time, the idea of films became familiar, the magic was accepted — but it never stopped being magic. Film has never lost its unique power to embrace its audience and transport them to a different world.

    One effect of this realism was to educate the world about itself. Cinema makes the world smaller. Long before people travelled to America or anywhere else, they knew what other places looked like and how other people worked and lived. Undoubtedly, in the lives recorded in film people knew more about American life. Hollywood has dominated the world film market. American imagery — the cars, the cities, the cowboys became the primary imagery of film. Film carried American life and values around the globe.

    And, thanks to film, future generations will know the 20th century more familiarly than any other period. We can only imagine what life was like in the 14th century or in classical Rome. But the life of the modern world has been recorded on films. We shall be known better than any preceding generations.

    The “star” was another natural consequence of cinema. The cinema star was effectively born in 1910. Because everybody in the world seems to know who they are, they appear more real to us than we do ourselves. The star as magnified human self is one of cinema's most strange and enduring legacies(遗产).

    Cinema films originally were planned as short stories, because early producers doubted the ability of audiences to concentrate for more than the length of a reel. Then, in 1912, an Italian 2-hour film was hugely successful, and Hollywood settled upon the novel-length narrative that remains the dominant cinematic convention of today.

    And it has all happened so quickly. Almost unbelievably, it is only 100 years since that train arrived and the audience screamed and fled, perhaps, suddenly aware that the world could never be the same again — that, maybe, it could be better, brighter, more astonishing and more real than reality.

Seeds on Ice

    Close to the North Pole, remote and rocky Plateau Mountain in the Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard seems an unlikely spot for any global effort to safeguard agriculture. In this cold and deserted environment, no grains, no gardens, no trees can grow. Yet at the end of a 130-meter-long tunnel cut out of solid stone is a room filled with humanity's most precious treasure, the largest and most diverse seed collection—more than a half-billion seeds.

    A quiet rescue mission is under way. With growing evidence that unchecked climate change-will seriously affect food production and threaten the diversity （多样性） of crops around the world, the Svalbard Global Seed Vault （地窖） represents a major step towards ensuring the preservation （贮藏） of hundreds of thousands of crop varieties. This is a seed collection, but more importantly, it is a collection of the traits found within the seeds: the genes that give one variety resistance to a particular pest and another variety tolerance for hot, dry weather.

    Few people will ever see or come into contact with the contents of this vault. In sealed boxes, behind multiple locked doors, monitored by electronic security systems, enveloped in below—zero temperatures, and surrounded by tons of rock, hundreds of millions of seeds are protected in their mountain fortress. Frozen in such conditions inside the mountain, seeds of most major crops will remain viable for hundreds of years, or longer. Seeds of some are capable of retaining （保留） their ability to grow for thousands of years.

    Everyone can look back now and say that the Seed Vault was a good and obvious idea, and that of course the Norwegian government should have approved and funded it. But back in 2004, when the Seed Vault was proposed, it was viewed as a crazy, impractical, and expensive idea.

    We knew that nothing would provide a definite guarantee. But we were tired, fed up, and frankly scared of the steady, greater losses of crop diversity. The Seed Vault was built by optimists who wanted to do something to preserve options so that humanity and its crops might be better prepared for change. If it simply resupplied seed gene banks with samples those gene banks had lost, this would repay our efforts.

    The Seed Vault is about hope and commitment-about what can be done if countries come together and work cooperatively to accomplish something significant, long-lasting, and worthy of who we are and wish to be.