虚浮不求实 改名无法挽救马航

Whenever a company suffers a setback or calamity, business school professors and management journalists lay out the lessons for other businesses.
每当一家公司遇到挫折或者灾难，商学院教授和管理类新闻记者就会为其它公司总结经验教训。

That was true for General Motors and its faulty ignitions (make sure employees who spot problems bring them to management’s attention) and Starbucks’ UK tax difficulties (don’t underestimate consumers’ ability to do you damage).
在通用汽车(General Motors)的点火开关缺陷（教训是保证发现问题的员工将问题传达到管理层）事件上是这样，在星巴克(Starbucks)在英国遭遇税务问题（教训是别低估消费者给你造成损失的能力）的时候也是这样。

But there does not appear much other companies can learn from Malaysia Airlines’ travails. Its twin disasters – one passenger jet lost and the other apparently shot down – are too unusual to generate advice for anyone else.
但是其它公司似乎没办法从马来西亚航空公司(Malaysia Airlines)的困境中学到什么。一架客机失踪，一架客机则明显被击落，马航遭遇的这两起灾难太不寻常，不能给其他人带来什么重要教训。

It is hard to see what the airline itself can learn from the tragedies. The first is still unexplained. The second was not its fault. It was flying over a war zone, but so were other respectable carriers.
马航自身能从这些悲剧中学到什么也很难说。第一起事故至今还未查明原因。第二起事故错不在马航。马航客机的确飞经战区，但是其他优秀航空公司也这样做。

Given these awful misfortunes, it is understandable that the airline is contemplating changing its name and starting again as something else.
考虑到这些可怕的不幸事故，也难怪马航正在考虑更改公司名称，以新的身份重新开始。

We can see how extraordinary Malaysia Airlines’ plight is by looking at the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s safety report.
看一看国际民航组织(International Civil Aviation Organisation)的安全报告，我们就能理解马航的困境有多不寻常了。

In 2013, 3.1bn passengers took a scheduled international or domestic flight. Of those, 173 died in an accident. This year’s figures will be higher – there have been other fatal crashes, including that of Air Algérie in Mali – but they will still be a tiny proportion of passengers.
2013年，有31亿名乘客乘坐国际或者国内的定期航班，其中有173人死于事故。今年的死亡人数会更高——除了马航两起事故以外，还发生了其他坠机事故，包括阿尔及利亚航空公司(Air Algérie)的飞机在马里坠毁——但依然只会占乘客总数的很小一部分。