question: Mary David knew she wanted to be a movie star when she was very young. She was not sure what gave her the idea, but she wanted to look like a movie star. "I have a lot of pictures from my childhood of me wearing sunglasses," she says. "I used to wear them to watch TV." Early movie actors started wearing sunglasses, not because they looked good, but because their eyes hurt. The lights used on movie sets were really bright and could cause a painful problem known as "Klieg eyes". It was named after the Klieg brothers who invented the lights. Actors wore sunglasses to give their eyes a rest. But when movie stars began wearing their sunglasses in public, they quickly became a must. From then on, actors started wearing sunglasses in their movies as well as on the street. Audrey Hepburn wore ultra-cool Ray-Ban sunglasses in the 1961 movie, Breakfast at Tiffany's. As a result, Ray-Ban sunglasses started to appear more and more in the movies. In 1979, Ray-Ban "Wayfarers" were worn by Jake and Elwood in The Blue Brothers. Tom Cruise wore Ray-Ban "Aviator" sunglasses in the 1986 hit, Top Gun. Then in 1997, Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones made Ray-Ban "Predator" sunglasses famous in Men in Black.
1. why did early movie actors wear sunglasses?
2. what did mary david want to be?
3. what did she like to wear when she was young?
4. what was the name of the painful problem that lights can cause?
5. named after who?
6. what year did the movie breakfast at tiffany's come out?
7. who was in it?
8. what brand of glasses did she wear?
9. who wore Wayfarers?
10. in what movie?
11. from what year?
12. Did Tom Cruise also wear Ray-Ban?
13. what style?
14. in what movie?
15. what year did that come out?
16. did Will Smith wear Ray-Ban too?
17. with who?
18. in what movie?
19. in what year?
****
answer: 1. their eyes hurt
2. a movie star
3. sunglasses
4. Klieg eyes
5. the Klieg brothers
6. 1961
7. Audrey Hepburn
8. Ray-Ban
9. Jake and Elwood
10. The Blue Brothers
11. 1979
12. yes
13. Aviator
14. Top Gun
15. 1986
16. yes
17. Tommy Lee Jones
18. Men in Black
19. 1997

question: Moreover, a conflict of interest between professional investment managers and their institutional clients, combined with a global glut in investment capital, led to bad investments by asset managers in over-priced credit assets. Professional investment managers generally are compensated based on the volume of client assets under management. There is, therefore, an incentive for asset managers to expand their assets under management in order to maximize their compensation. As the glut in global investment capital caused the yields on credit assets to decline, asset managers were faced with the choice of either investing in assets where returns did not reflect true credit risk or returning funds to clients. Many asset managers chose to continue to invest client funds in over-priced (under-yielding) investments, to the detriment of their clients, in order to maintain their assets under management. This choice was supported by a "plausible deniability" of the risks associated with subprime-based credit assets because the loss experience with early "vintages" of subprime loans was so low.
1. How are professional investment managers compensated?
2. what effect does this have?
3. did they feel pressure to grow the assets under their control?
4. who did they have a conflict of interest with?
5. what decision did they have to make when profits from credit assets went down?
6. which did many of them choose?
7. did this benefit their clientele?
8. what effect did too much global investment capital have?
9. was the danger with subprime mortgages considered high?
10. what could they have done instead of investing the client's money?
****
answer: 1. on the volume of client assets under management
2. led to bad investments
3. yes
4. their clients
5. choice of either investing in assets where returns did not reflect true credit risk or returning funds to clients
6. to continue to invest client funds in over-priced investments
7. No
8. caused the yields on credit assets to decline
9. No
10. return funds to clients

question: BBC Online, formerly known as BBCi, is the BBC's online service. It is a large network of websites including such high-profile sites as BBC News and Sport, the on-demand video and radio services co-branded BBC iPlayer, the children's sites CBBC and CBeebies, and learning services such as Bitesize. The BBC has had an online presence supporting its TV and radio programmes and web-only initiatives since 1994 but did not launch officially until December 1997, following government approval to fund it by TV licence fee revenue as a service in its own right. Throughout its short history, the online plans of the BBC have been subject to harassment from its commercial rivals, which has resulted in various public consultations and government reviews to investigate their claims that its large presence and public funding distorts the UK market.

The website has gone through several branding changes since it was launched. Originally named BBC Online, it was then rebranded as BBCi (which itself was the brand name for interactive TV services) before being named bbc.co.uk. It was then renamed BBC Online again in 2008, however the service uses the branding "BBC". The web-based service of the BBC is one of the most visited websites (fifty-fifth most visited according to Alexa in January 2013) and the world's largest news website. As of 2007, it contained over two million pages.
1. What was BBC Online formerly known as?
2. What is BBC Online?
3. What is included of it's network of websites?
4. What was it's Alexa ranking in 2013?
5. Whas BBC Online ever harrassed by any of it's rivals?
6. What as the result of this?
7. Does it host any online streaming and radio services?
8. When was the webservice Rebranded BBC Online?
9. What does the goverment fund it with
10. When was BBC Online's official launch?
11. How many pages does it contain as of 2007?
****
answer:
1. BBCi
2. the BBC's online service
3. high-profile sites
4. fifty-fifth most visited
5. yes
6. public consultations and government reviews
7. yes
8. 2008
9. TV licence fee revenue
10. December 1997
11. over two million