跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.192.20.240) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/02/25 01:13
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:曹開明
研究生(外文):Kai-Ming Tsao
論文名稱:媒體論述中的說服與操控:從ECFA新聞報導建構「新聞語藝」之批判意涵
論文名稱(外文):Persuasion and Manipulation in the News Media Discourse: "News Rhetoric" Reconstructed in the News of ECFA
指導教授:黃鈴媚黃鈴媚引用關係
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:世新大學
系所名稱:傳播研究所(含博士班)
學門:傳播學門
學類:一般大眾傳播學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2011
畢業學年度:99
語文別:中文
論文頁數:216
中文關鍵詞:新聞語藝ECFA新聞基模去自然化操控
外文關鍵詞:news rhetoricECFAnews schemadenaturalizemanipulationpersuasion
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:5
  • 點閱點閱:663
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:2
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
台灣面對簽署ECFA此一攸關未來數十年最重要的政經議題,具備特定政治意識形態的媒體各有立場,並針對ECFA議題進行論述筆戰;吊詭的是,兩方在報導中均宣稱是立基於福國利民(或是憂國憂民)的原則,為了民眾權益而發聲。本研究意欲釐清在全然支持與全然反對ECFA的媒體報導爭論,在彼此僵持、對峙以及相互引用以為批評的過程中,運用「新聞語藝」所形塑出語藝策略是否涉及說服與操控交相運用情形,甚或是封閉媒體接近權的問題。
本研究主要強調「批判論述分析」應結合「語藝批評方法」,方能呈現出「新聞語藝批評」的要旨,藉以探討媒體如何運用語藝策略,以達到操控閱聽眾認知的目標;本研究選取中國時報與自由報報ECFA新聞相關報導為樣本,進一步釐清媒體新聞論述中運用語藝策略,表達對ECFA議題支持或是反對的立場時,涉及說服甚或是操控讀者認同或「誤認」問題。因此,本研究期能透過「新聞語藝」批評分析,提供閱聽眾對於媒體的語藝行為有進一步體會,以便賦與閱聽眾逃脫媒體主宰意識形態再現的能量。
ECFA is a policy that has a great impact on Taiwan’s political and economic spheres. As a result, the press media harboring partisan political ideologies and stands raise a battle of discourse on ECFA issues. A paradoxical aspect of these reports is worth studying. That is, although each side advocates controversial arguments, both sides claim that they report ECFA on a concern for the public or national welfare and best interests of the people. Therefore, this dissertation aims to clarify and to examine whether the rhetorical strategies utilized by both sides are involved both persuasion and manipulation, or even limit the right of access to the media when both sides are caught in a hostile stalemate and further refer to each other to criticize the other side’s advocacy or opposition.
This dissertation mainly emphasizes the necessity to integrate “critical discourse analysis” with “rhetorical criticism” for a manifestation of the very essence of “news rhetorical criticism”. Based on the reconstruction of the implications of “news rhetoric”, this dissertation explores how press media, especially China Times and Liberty Times, utilize rhetorical strategies to gain the audience recognition and further clarifies whether rhetorical strategies utilized in both media misdirect the audience recognition and result in “misrecognition”. Therefore, this dissertation expects to foster the media literacy of the audience through the concept of “news rhetorical criticism” and to empower the audience to escape the dominating influence that the media is imposing on their political thinking.
目 次
第一章 研究動機與目的……………………………………………6
第一節 研究動機 ………………………………………………11
第二節 研究目的 ……………………………………………16
第二章 文獻探討 ……………………………………………21
第一節 「新聞語藝」分析 ………………………………………23
第二節 批判論述分析 ………………………………………………35
第三節 新聞語藝批評分析 …………………………………………50
第三章 ECFA新聞爭論與研究方法 ………………………………63
第一節 ECFA引發政治爭論 ………………………………………67
第二節 文本分析程序 ……………………………………………74
第四章 新聞基模分析………………………………………………82
第一節 ECFA正名 ……………………………………………83
第二節 中共ECFA讓利 …………………………………………88
第三節 「雙英」辯論會 …………………………………………95
第四節 ECFA民調爭議 ……………………………………103
第五節 早收清單 ……………………………………………108
第六節 ECFA立院審查 ………………………………………115
第七節 小結 …………………………………………………121
第五章 語藝策略分 ……………………………………………124
第一節 ECFA議題語藝策略分析 ………………………………125
第二節 是說服也是操控 …………………………………………141
第三節 有效性宣稱判準 ………………………………………163
第六章結論 …………………………………………………178
第一節 兩岸各自營造論述循環 …………………………………180
第二節 新聞真實與媒體預言 …………………………………189
第三節 閱聽眾的逃逸路線 …………………………………196
第四節 研究限制與未來研究建議 ……………………………202

參考書目 …………………………………………………………205
參考書目
西文部分:
Allen,S.(1998).News from Now Here:televisual news discourse and the condstruction of hegemony. In Bell,A. & Garrett,P.(Eds.). Approach to Media Discourse. Oxford:Blackwell.
Bakhtin, M. M.(1990) Art and answerability: Early philosophical essays by M. M. Bakhtin(M. Holquist & V Liapunov, Eds.: V. Liapunov & k. Brostrom, Trans.). Austin: Texas University Press.
Baxter, L. A., Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues And Dialectics. NY: Guilford.
Baxter, L. A.(2004). Relationships as dialogues. Personal Relationships. 11,1-22.
Bell, A.(1991).The Language of News Media. Oxford:Blackwell.
Bennett,L.W.(1988). News: The Politics Of Illusion. N.Y.: Longman.
Billig,M.(2003). Critical discourse analysis amd the rhetoric of critique. In Weiss, G. & Wodak, R.(Eds). Critical discourse analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity. London:Palgrave Macmillan.
Blackjedge,A.(2005). Discourse And Power In A Multilingual World. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Blommaert, J,(2004). Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu,P.(1991).Language & Symbolic Power. Cambridge:Polity Press.
Burke, K.(1968). Counter-Statement. Berkeley,Ca: California Press.
Burke, K.(1969). A Rhetoric Of Motives. Berkeley,Ca: California Press.
Burke,K.(1969) A Grammar Of Motives. Berkerey: U. California Press.
Burke, K.(1989). TheLegacy Of Kenneth Burke Wisconsin:University of Wisconsin.
Burke, K.(1996). Language As Symbolic Action. Berkeley,Ca: California Press.
Cameron, D.(2001). Working with Spoken Discourse. London:Sage.
Carvalho,A.(2008) Media(ted) discourse and society: Rethinking the framework of critical discourse analysis. Journalism Studies.9(2):161-177.
Chi-Wei Wu.(1986).A rhetorical analysis of selected Speeches: generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek during the war of resistance against Japanese aggression,1937-1945. Ohio University,Ohio.
Cukier & Ngwenyama(2009).A critical of media discourse on information technology: preliminary results of a proposed method for critical discourse analysis.Information System Journal.19:175-196.
Curran,J. & Seaton, J.(1991). Power Without Responsibility: ThePpress And Broadcasting In Britain. London: Routledge.
Edward, D. & Potter, J.(1992). Discursive Psychology. London:Sage.
Emerson, C. (1997). The First Hundred Years Of Mikhail Bakhtin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Entman,R.M.(1993).Framing: Toward clarification of a fratured paradigm. Journal of communication. 43(4):51-58.
ErJavec, K.(2001).Media representation of the discrimination against thr Roma in Eastern Europe: the case of Slovenia.12(6):699-727.
Fairclough,N.(2001).Language And Power. London:Longman.
Fairclough,N.(1995a).Critical Discourse Analysis:The Crucial Sstudy Of Language. London:Longman.
Fairclough,N.(1995b).Media Discourse.NY:Edward Arnold.
Fairclough,N. & Wodak,R.(1997).Critical discourse analysis. In Van Dijk(Eds). Discourse Studies: A multidisciplinary introduction. Volume 2. London:Sage.
Fairclough,N.(2001).Language And Power.Harlow:Longman.
Fisher R.Walter(1978).Toward a logic of good reasons.The quarterly journal of speech 64:376-384.
Fisher R.Walter(1980).“Rationality and the Logic of Good Reasons. Philosophy and Rhetoric 13(2):121-130.
Fisher R.Walter(1978).The narrateve paradigm:an elaboration.
Communication Monograpgs 52:347-367.
Fisher R.Walter(1987).Human communication as narrative: toward a philosophy of reason, vslue, and action. Columbia ,SC:University of South Carolina Press..
Fisher R.Walter(1989).Clarifying the narrative paradigm.Communication Monograph.s 56:55-58.
Fleras,A.(1998).Working through differences: the politics of “Isms” in Aotearoa. New Zealand Sociology 13(1):62-96.
Foss, K.& Griffin, L. (1995) Beyond persuasion:a proposal foe a invitational rhetoric. Communication Monographs 62,2-18.
Foss, S., Foss, K., & Trapp, R., (2002). Contemporary Perspectives On Rhetoric. Prospect. Illinois: Wateaveland.
Foss, S.(1996).Rhetorical Criticism:Exploration & Practice(2nded). Prospect Heights, ILL:Waveland Press.
Fowler, R.(1991a). Discourse And Ideology In The Press. London: Routeledge.
Fowler, R.(1991b). Language In The News. London:Routeledge.
Fozdar,F.(2008).Duelling discourses, shared weapons: rhetorical techniques used to challenge racist arguments. Discourse Society. 19:529-547.
Gans, J.H.(2004)Deciding What’s News.Evanston:Northwestern University Press.
Gaonkar, P. D.(1999). In Lucaites, J. L. & Condit , C. M. & Caudill Sally (Eds.), Contemporary rhetorical theory. (pp.194-212). NY: Guilford.
Gardiner, M. E.(2004). Wild publics and grotesque symposium: Habermas and Bakhtin on dialogue, everyday life and the public sphere. The Sociological Review.52(s1),28-48.
Garett,P. & Bell,A.(1998)Media and discourse: a critical overview. In Bell, A. & Garett, P.(eds) Approach to media discourse. Oxford:Blackwell.
Hakam,J.(2009).The ‘cartoons controversy’: a critical discourse analysis of English-language Arab newspaper discourse. Discourse & Society.20(1),33-57.
Hall,S.(1978).The Social production of news. In S. Hall, C. Critcher, T. Jefferson, J. Clarke and B. Roberts(eds). Policing the crisis: mugging, the State, and the law and order. London Macmillan.
Hauser, A. G. (2002). Introduction to Rhetorical Theory:2nd Edition. Prospect Height: Waveland.
Hepburn, A. Wiggins, S. Developments in discursive psychology. Discourse and Society,16(5):595-601.
Hernandaz, A.(2008). Discursive strategies in the construction of national identityL a critical discourse analysis of the Gibraltar issue in the printed media. National identities,10(2):25-235.
Herrick, J. A. (2006). The History And Ttheory Of Rhetoric: An Introduction(2nd ed.). Boston:allyn & Bacon.
Holmes, J. (2005). Story-telling at work:a complex discursive resource for integrating personal, professional and social identities. Discourse Studies, 7(6), 671-700.
Iyengar,S.(1989).How citizens think about national Issues: a matter of responsibility. American Journal of Political Science,33(4):878-900.
Jing Yin(2007).The clash of rights: a critical analysis of news discourse on human rights in the United States and China. Critical Discourse Studies.4(1):75-94.
Kuppers A.Jim(2005).The Art Of Rhetorical Criticism. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
Kuypers J.A.,(2005). What is rhetoric? In Kuypers J.A.(Eds.), The art of rhetorical criticism(pp1-12). Boston:Pearson..
Merleau-Ponty, M.(1973). The Prose Of The World (C. Lefort, Ed.; O’Neill, J., Trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Meyer Michael(2001).Between theory, method, and politics: positioning of the approaches to CDA. In Wodak, R & Mayer M(Eds) Method of critical discourse analysis.London:SAGE.
Muntz, P. (1990). The danger of dichotomy. Journal of the history of ideas 51(1), 121-142.
Nelson, C. (1999),The linguishicality of cultural studies: rhetoric, close reading, and contextualization. In Rosteck, T.(Eds.).At the Intersection: culturals studies and theoreticalsStudies(pp211-225).. New York: Guilford Publications.
Page, R.(2006).Literary And Linguistic ApproachesTto Feminist Narratology. Houndmills:Palgrave Macmillan.
Parenti, M.(1993). Inventing Reality: The Politics Of News Media. N.Y.:St. Martin.
Potter,J. et al(1993). A model of discourse in action. American Behavioral Scientist. 36(3):383-401.
Poulakos, J.(1999). Toward a sophistic definition of rhetoric. In Lucaites, J. L. & Condit , C. M. & Caudill Sally (Eds.), Contemporary rhetorical theory. (pp. 25-34). NY: Guilford.
Reisigl, M. & Wodak,R.(2001).Discourse And Discrimination:Rrhetorics Of Racism And Anti-Semitism.N.Y.: Routledge.
Rosteck, T., (1999) A Cultural tradition in rhetorical studies. In Rosteck, T.(Eds.), At the Intersection: cultural studies and theoretical Studies(pp226-247). New York: Guilford Publications.
Scult, A. (1985) .On hegemony-he give it no name-and critical structuralism in the work of Kenneth Burke. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 71: 129- 145.
Sloop, J. M. & Olson, M. (1999). Cultural struggle: a politics of meaning in rhetorical studies. In Rosteck, T.(Eds.), At the Intersection:cultural studies and theoretical studies(pp248-265). New York: Guilford Publications.
Smith,C.R.& Eisenberg,M.E.(1987).Conflict at disneyland:a root-metaphor analysis.Communication Monographs.54,365-380.
Stewart,C.O.(2005).A Rhetorical Approach to news discourse:media representation of a controversial study on “reparative therapy”.Western Journal of Communication.69(2):147-166.
Thomas, S.(2003). The trouble with our schools’: a construction of public discourses on Queensland schools. Discourse: studies in the cultural polities of education.24(1):19-33.
Tileaga, C.(2005).Accounting for extreme predjudice and legitimating blame in talk about th Romanies. Discourse and Society, 16(5):603-624.
Tracy, K. (2002). EverydayTtalk: Building And Reflecting Identities. NY: Guilford.
van Gorp(2005).Where is the frame? Victim and intruders in the Belgian press coverage of the asylum issue. European Journal communication. 20:485-508.
van Gorp(2007).The constructionist approach to framing: Bringing culture back in. Journal of communication. 57:60-78.
van Dijk(1983).Discourse analysis: Its development and application to structure of news. Journal of Communication.33(2):20-43.
van Dijk(1988a).How “They” hit the headline: ethnic minorities in the press, in Smitherman-Donaldson, G. and Van Dijk. (Eds) Discourse and Discrimination. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
van Dijk(1988b). News As Discourse. New Jersey:Erlbaum.
van Dijk(1988c). News Analysis:Case Study Of International And National News In The Press. New Jersey:Erlbaum.
van Dijk(1991). Racism And The Presse. London:Routledge.
van Dijk(1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 4(2):249-283.
van Dijk(1998a).Opinions and ideologies in the press. In Bell,A & Garrett.P.(Eds). Approaches to media discourse.pp21-63. Oxford:Blackwell.
van Dijk(1998b). Ideology : A Multidisciplinary Approach. London:Sage.
van Dijk(2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse and society. 17(3):359-383.
van Dijk(2008a). Discourse And Power. N.Y.Palgrave.
van Dijk(2008b). Discourse And Context:A Sociocognitive Aapproach. NY:Cambridge University Press.
van Dijk(2009). SocietyAand Discourset:How Social Context Influence Text And Talk. NY:Cambridge University Press.
van Leeuwen, T. & and Wodak, R.(1999). Legitimizing immigration control: a discourse-historical analysis. Discourse Studies. 1(1):83-118.
Verdooleage, A.(2005).Media representations of the South African Truth and Recconciliation Commission and their commitment to reconciliation. Journal of African Cultural Studies.17(2):181-199.
Wodak Ruth(2001).What CDA is about- a summary of its history, important acncepts and its development. In Wodak, R & Mayer M(Eds) Method of critical discourse analysis.London:SAGE.
Yin, J.(2007).The clash of rights: a critical analysis of news discourse on human rights in the United States and China.Critical Discourse Studies.4(1):75-94.

中文部分:
王孝勇(2003)。《呂秀蓮副總統言論中的「自我」:女性主義觀點的敘事批評》。臺北:輔仁大學傳播研究所碩士論文。
王曉玉、宋偉杰譯 (2006)。《理解大眾文化》。北京:中央編譯出版社。
白春仁等譯(1998)。《巴赫金全集》第四集。石家庄:河北教育出版社。
朱敬一主編(2009)。《ECFA:開創兩岸互利雙贏新局面》。台北:遠景。
江靜之(2010)。〈廣電新聞訪問者之不同閱聽人想像:論述心理學之觀點〉,《新聞學研究》。102:35-56。
李萬來(2000)。〈台灣媒體與政治力關係〉,《新聞鏡週刊》。595:39。
宋鎮照(2009)。〈兩岸和平發展的新思維與新策略:從經貿整合到政治趨勢〉,《全球政治評論》。28:63-93。
辛炳隆(2009)。〈ECFA與進口救濟措施〉,朱敬一(編)《ECFA:開創兩岸互利雙贏新局面》,頁179-195。台北:遠景。
《ECFA:開創兩岸互利雙贏新局面》。45:110-113。
林靜伶(2000)。《語藝批評─理論與實踐》。台北:五南。
胡春陽(2007)。《話語分析:傳播研究的新路徑》。上海:上海人民出版社。
施懿珊(2002)。《李登輝總統言論之戲劇觀─從柏克戲劇五因語藝觀點分析》,臺北:世新大學傳研所碩士論文。
倪炎元(1996)。〈主流與非主流─報紙對1990年國民黨黨內政爭報導與評論的論述分析〉,《新聞學研究》。53:143-159。
倪炎元(1999a)。〈批判論述分析與媒介研究之初探─兼論其在華文媒介上的應用〉,《傳播管理學刊》。1(1):205-233。
倪炎元(1999b)。〈再現的政治:解讀媒介對他者負面建構的策略〉,《新聞學研究》。58:85-111。
倪炎元(2001)。〈初探論述分析與傳播研究─兼論其在中文傳播研究上上的前景〉,《2000傳播論文選集》。台北:中華傳播學會。
唐維敏等譯 (2003)。《文化、社會與媒體:批判性觀點》。
台北:遠流。
徐美苓等(2010)。〈台灣人口「問題」的建構:以少子化新聞框架為例〉,《新聞學研究》。103:43-82。
韋伯韜(2009)。〈應盡速通過ECFA〉,《卓越雜誌》。296:3-4。
黃玉霖(2009)。〈公民投票「兩岸ECFA」:正當性、可能途徑和難題〉,《新世紀智庫論壇》。45:110-113。
陳彥希、林嘉玫、張庭譽譯(2003)。《宣傳與說服》。台北:韋伯文化。
陳添枝主編(2010) 。《不能沒有ECFA─東亞區域經濟整合對台灣的挑戰》。台北:遠景。
陳博志(2008)。〈CEPA的虛幻誘餌與實質圈套〉。財團法人台灣智庫。取自http://www.taiwanthinktank.org/chinese/page/3/76/1098/0。
陳博志主編(2010)。《ECFA不能說的秘密?》。台北:台灣智庫。
夏家安(2002)。《網路溝通行動理論之探討:以網路核四之論述實踐為例》。嘉義:中正大學電訊傳播研究所碩士論文。
翁秀琪等著(1997)。《新聞與社會真實建構─大眾媒體、官方消息與社會運動的三角關係》。台北:三民書局。
曾慶香譯(2003)。《作為話語的新聞》。北京:華夏。
賀德芬(2001)〈媒體與政治的愛恨情仇〉,《動腦》。297:18-19。
游梓翔(2006)。《領袖的聲音─兩岸領導人政治語藝批評,1906-2000》。台北:五南。
張五岳(2010a)。〈兩岸的ECFA應妥善處理「一中」爭議與「三中」疑慮〉。亞太和平基金會。
取自:http:www.faps.org.tw/issue/subject.aspx?pk=95。
張五岳(2010b)。〈公民投票「兩岸ECFA」:正當性、可能途徑和難題〉,《新世紀智庫論壇》。45:110-113。
張五岳(2010c)。〈中國大陸與香港簽署CEPA的政治經濟意義〉,陳添枝(編)《不能沒有ECFA─東亞區域經濟整合對台灣的挑戰》,頁149-174。台北:遠景。
張卿卿、羅文輝(2009)。〈政論性談話節目影響之探討〉,《新聞學研究》。98: 47-90。
楊意菁(2005)。〈民調報導的媒體論述與民意建構─一個批判論述語言的觀點〉,《中華傳播學刊》。7:183-226。
鄭杏玲(2009)。《哈柏瑪斯溝通行動理論在國民中學衝突管理應用之研究》。臺北:台灣師範大學教育學系博士論文。
潘忠黨(2006)。〈架構分析:一個亟需理論澄清的領域〉,《傳播與社會學刊》。1:17-46。
劉康(2005),《對話的喧聲─巴赫汀文化理論述評》。台北:麥田。
劉任主編(2010)。《ECFA關鍵報告》。台北:中華徵信所。
劉大年(2009)。〈兩岸建構「ECFA」的意涵與前景〉,《展望與探索》。7:15-19。
臧國仁(1999)。《新聞媒體與消息來源─媒介框架與真實建構之論述》。台北:三民書局。
曉河等譯(1998)。《巴赫金全集》第一集。石家庄:河北教育出版社。
蕭淨宇(2007)。《超越語言學─巴赫金語言學哲學研究》。上海:人民出版社。
鍾蔚文(2004)。〈想像語言:從Saussure到台灣經驗〉,翁秀琪(編)《台灣傳播學的想像》,頁199-264。
蘇峰山(2004)。〈論述分析導論〉,《教育社會學通訊》。55:3-11。
羅世宏等譯(2005)。《文化研究:理論與實踐》。台北:五南。(原書Barker, Chris [2000]. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. London:Sage.)
羅鋼、劉象愚主編(2000)。《文化研究讀本》,北京:中國社會科學出版社。
電子全文 電子全文(本篇電子全文限研究生所屬學校校內系統及IP範圍內開放)
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top