This year, Facebook, the social media website, announced that it would cooperate with several news organizations —including The New York Times, The Guardian, and the BBC —to place news stories directly into users' personal Facebook webpage. Stories published using Facebook Instant will load more quickly and keep the style of the original publisher, who will keep all the advertising income the stories earn —at least for now. The deal shows how important social media has become to news organizations, and it is a clear sign of how the world of news is changing —and has been for a while.

    Many thought of it as the death of the newspaper, when Google News began in 2002. It had no human editor. Instead, Google used, and still uses, a secret computer program that selects and displays news stories according to the reader's personal interests. More recently, Associated Press and Yahoo have been punishing computer-written articles. Both use special software to automatically produce stories about company financial results and sports reports —areas where the quality of writing is felt to be of secondary importance to the accuracy of the data.

    I think we should be concerned about such developments. One concern is that Facebook, Google and other social media websites see journalism as a sideline(副业), a way of putting people in front of advertisements. It isn't their primary function —so if it stops making them lots of money, they're likely to stop doing it.

    There's another concern that computer-written articles are not actually journalism at all, because what a human news team produces is actually quite complex. A well-written news story puts information in context, offers a voice to each side of an argument and brings the public new knowledge.

    Though economics and speed of delivery mean readers will probably choose a computer-written story over a carefully shaped article — at least for daily news —I don't think the computers will be writing any in-depth articles for a while yet.

    If a stranger offered you money to keep a suitcase in your spare room，would you accept? How about the other way round：if you had too many belongings，would you consider trusting someone you met online with their safekeeping? Anthony Paine believed enough of us would answer “yes” to these questions to launch his own startup(新兴公司)，Stashbee．His business links people with space to those who need it．

    And it's just one player in the booming “sharing economy”，an industry that relies on people renting out things like their beds，bikes and even parking spaces．Airbnb，a company valued at 200bn RMB，provides a platform for those renting property short-term．DogVacay pairs holidaymaking pet owners with pet-friendly hosts，and aims to be profitable by 2017．

    All their business models revolve around one simple word：trust．So，how does Stashbee measure up? BBC journalist Dougal Shaw decided to try it out for himself．He had some odds and ends to store while renovating his house，and met a host through the site who could keep them for 475 RMB for two months．All relatively smooth and painless．

    Heavyweights(行业巨头)in the traditional storage industry，such as Big Yenow and Access，aren't convinced．A representative from Access told Shaw he was skeptical about storing with “amateurs”．He considered 24／7(全天候) access to the items and better security as the main advantages of his service.

    Stashbee agree that dealing with security concerns is important，but say business success depends more on people overcoming a distrust of strangers we've been taught since childhood. They aren't alone．Companies such as Costockage，Roost and Spacer all run similar storage businesses，and are all relying on a shift in consumer attitudes．

    And the concept of social storage doesn't stop there．CityStasher believe there's a gap in the market for those who want to store things for extremely short periods of time．

    Would you try it out? It's a question of trust．

    The summer before my dad died, we moved house. Up until that point, our family had our own space to spread out. Money was tight, so there was no television set, but we owned a turntable on which my dad's records played constantly. Mostly, it played Bob Dylan. Tracks from The Basement Tapes and Desire became an important part of our new life. My brother and I, aged 8 and 10, climbed trees, built hideaways and learned the words of Clothes Line Saga. We would chant over the, lost in our own joy.

    It was January when my dad left us forever because of the cancer. He was 36 going on 37 then, the same age as Dylan. Afterwards, our laughter disappeared, but we kept on playing the records, which became our only ritual of remembrance. The two men became so intertwined in my head, I struggled to tell them apart.

    Dylan was my dad's gift to me. What child wouldn't be fascinated by songs full of pirates and seasick sailors? How did it feel to have No direction home? Farewell, Angelina became my party-piece. I would sing this at church cheese and wines to the assembled audience. A lot of donations were made.

    Growing up, I remained a fan of the music, but I wasn't obsessed with Dylan until one day in early 1995, my brother bought us both tickets to see him play at Brixton Academy. London felt like a long way to go. But finally seeing Dylan step out onto the stage brought a sudden rush of excitement.

    I have seen Dylan a couple of times since. My brother is not around so much these days. But he was up for a visit recently. We passed a happy evening laughing and drinking, while his son, aged nine, performed his party—piece Subterranean Homesick Blues for us. He sang it word-perfect. And so it goes on: Dylan's music as a gift, passed down the generations.

    Of course, she wasn't really my aunt and, out of fear, I never called her that to her face. I only referred to her as "My Aunt Fannie" because the name always made my father laugh quietly and gave my mother cause to look strictly at both of us—at me for being disrespectful of my elder and at my father for encouraging my bad behavior. I enjoyed both reactions so I looked for every opportunity to work the name into as many conversations as possible.

    As a young woman, my mother had worked in the kitchen of a large Victorian farmhouse. During those years my mother helped Aunt Fanny make the best blueberry jam ever tasted by anyone in Glenfield. She was well-known for her jam and for never sharing the recipe(食谱) with others. Even though my mother knew the recipe by heart, as long as Aunt Fannie was alive, she never made the jam without Aunt Fannie in our kitchen to direct the process and keep the secret.

    Each August, my mother would prepare me for Aunt Fannie's visit. One year, after I had helped with the jam process Aunt Fannie gave me a coin and then made me promise that I would never spend it. "Hold onto this coin," she said, "and someday you will be rich. I still have my very first coin, given to me by my grandmother." So I kept the coin in a small box and waited to become rich.

    I now have the blueberry jam recipe and the coin from Aunt Fannie. In people's eyes Aunt Fannie's success resulted from that secret recipe. But to me, it was just a common recipe. Neither have made me become a rich person, but I keep them as reminders to hold onto the valuable things in life. Money can make you feel rich for a while, but it is the relationships and the memories of time spent with friends and family that truly leave you wealthy. And that is a fortune that anyone can build.

    Regardless of how far we'd like to believe gender (性别) equality in the workplace has come, there's still a yawning gap between male and female leaders in the professional world. A 2018 statistic showed that women nowadays hold just 5.8 percent of CEOS positions at S&P 500 companies, according to Catalyst.

    While it's not a huge shock that women are somewhat underrepresented in leadership positions, what is surprising though, is the fact that females may actually be better suited to lead in almost every area, at least according to new findings from the BI Norwegian Business School.

    In their research, Professor Oyvind L. Martinsen and Professor Lars Glas surveyed 2,900 managers with a special focus on personality types. The results were clear: Women scored higher than men in four of the five major leadership-centric categories while some people believe that men inherently make better leaders—probably because they picture a leader with a commanding voice, which is more typical of men than women—this is piece of research suggests that women are better at methodical management and goal-setting, openness, sociability and supportiveness, as well as ability to communicate clearly.

    There was one area in which men scored higher than women, though, and that was on emotional stability and ability to face job-related pressure and stress. The results suggested that women are more sensitive to the effects of high-pressure or highly emotional situations.

    Obviously, it's important to consider individual (个人的) differences. Anyone, regardless of gender, may be an inspiring leader and a competent boss. But next time you're hiring for a management position, you just might want to give the resumes(简历) from female candidates a harder look.