Panyu fan jian le se fen shao chang de ge an yan jiu

現有的媒體－抗爭互動機制研究，其結論多是主流媒體傾向非法化、瑣碎化社會運動。但針對威權語境中的媒體－抗爭互動現象，這一論點不再適用。本研究通過2009年廣州番禺反建垃圾焚燒廠事件，探究地方媒體與草根環境運動在與政府協商公共議題時，形成何種互動機制。本文以公共性概念為理論起點，以參與式公共性與可視性公共性這兩種模式作為分析工具，來理解媒體與運動的實踐及其互動。本研究使用多種方法考察事件發展過程，同時試圖建構出媒體－運動的互動機制。主要研究材料包括媒體文本、新聞從業者與抗爭居民的口頭和書面陳述。本文用內容分析方法考察媒體如何再現抗爭居民與當地政府的話語鬥爭，以及新聞框架如何發展演變。研究者與20位新聞從業者與抗爭居民進行深度訪談，以瞭解其行動的目的、策略與束縛，並探索雙方如何理解與評價自身、對方與社會語境。本文的主要貢獻，是通過考察威權語境中的媒體－運動的互動實踐現象來豐富原有的公共性概念。研究發現雙方形成了深度互動、平等、共存的關係。首先，媒體的報道使與抗爭相關的公共論述得以生成、發展、充實。多角度的媒體報道涵蓋了環保與民主參與等話題，由此挑戰了官方對抗爭的打壓式論述。其次，在運動的架構過程中，抗爭居民創造出媒介互動策略，具體表現為抗爭者認識到傳統媒體記者所受的束縛，並與其合作突破這種束縛。他們同時也使用新媒體平台直接動員公眾展開集體行動。最後，新聞從業者發展出抗爭新聞劇目的生產機制，使得抗爭事件停留於報端，令抗爭者成為公共論述的參與者。新聞從業者在追求職業認同與獨立時還借用抗爭的概念，將其用作由下至上新聞改革的資源。以上發現表明，媒體與社會運動作為社會行動者，其互動機制中體現出一種具有建構性與矛盾性的公共性。通過這一媒介化的抗爭事件，雙方發展出針對官方論述的話語抗爭，使得原本屬於越軌範疇的抗爭話語得以進入可公開爭議的合法範疇，由此得以重新界定公開話語空間中的意識形態邊界。Existing studies of media-movement interaction have argued that mainstream media tends to illegitimize and trivialize social movements. However, when applied to the newly emerged media-movement interactions in the context of an authoritarian regime, such argument becomes untenable. This study takes an anti-incinerator event taken place in Panyu, Guangzhou in 2009 as its foci of investigation. It examines how local media and the grassroots environmental movement cooperatively negotiated public issues with the government. The concept of publicity and two models of publicity (participatory publicity and visibility publicity) will be introduced. These two models will be used as analytical tools to understand the practice of and the interaction between the media and the movement.Methodologically, this study adopts multiple methods to trace the process of the event and model the media-movement interaction mechanism. This research constructs the case by analyzing the media texts, together with both oral and written accounts of the journalists and the activists. Content analysis is employed to measure how the media represent the discursive struggles between local residents and local government, as well as how the media frames have evolved during the event. In-depth interviews have been conducted with 20 activists and journalists to explore their intentions, strategies and constraints. Questions were also asked about how they understand and evaluate themselves, each other and the social context.The primary significance of this study is to explore how the notion of publicity is enriched by the dynamics of the media-movement interaction mechanism within an authoritarian context. The findings demonstrate that both parties have developed an increasingly interactive, equal and co-dependent relationship with one another. First, public discourses surrounding the movement have emerged and survived through the cooperation between journalists and activists. The media has developed diversified reporting angles covering not only environmental issues but also notions of democratic participation that challenged the suppressive official discourse. Second, during the framing process of the movement, the activists have invented an interactive media strategy that helped to break the constraints of journalistic practice within traditional media organizations. Meanwhile, they also adopted new media platforms to directly mobilize for collective action. Third, the journalists have developed a “journalistic repertoire of contention by which they successfully kept the story staying in the newspaper and incorporated the protesters’ voice into the public discussion. Moreover, while in search of their professional identity, the journalists also borrowed the idea of protest as a resource for the bottom-up media transformation.The above findings suggest that the notion of publicity constructed by the media-movement interaction in this study could be described as constructive and inconsistent. Against the official discourse, journalists and activists have collaborated on the discursive contention by means of the mediated event. By doing so, the previously marginalized “deviant contentious discourse was allowed to enter into the sphere of legitimate controversy, while the ideological boundaries of the public discursive space were also redefined.Detailed summary in vernacular field only.Detailed summary in vernacular field only.Detailed summary in vernacular field only.Detailed summary in vernacular field only.鄧力.Thesis (Ph.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2013.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 139-149).Electronic reproduction. Hong Kong : Chinese University of Hong Kong, [2012] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web.Abstracts in Chinese and English.Deng Li.Chapter 第1章 --- 導論 --- p.1Chapter 1.1 --- 案例描述與研究對象介紹 --- p.3Chapter 1.1.1 --- 案例描述 --- p.3Chapter 1.1.2 --- 研究對象 --- p.3Chapter 1.1.3 --- 研究對象關係圖 --- p.6Chapter 1.2 --- 論文的結構 --- p.8Chapter 第2章 --- 理論框架與研究問題 --- p.11Chapter 2.1 --- 關於媒體與抗爭政治的互動機制的文獻綜述 --- p.11Chapter 2.1.1 --- 媒體與衝突的關係機制 --- p.11Chapter 2.1.2 --- 民主社會語境下的媒體與社會運動關係研究 --- p.12Chapter 2.1.3 --- 威權社會語境下的媒體與社會運動關係研究 --- p.16Chapter 2.1.4 --- 本文研究路徑 --- p.18Chapter 2.2 --- 理論框架及研究問題 --- p.20Chapter 2.2.1 --- 理論旅行：情境視角下的公共性概念 --- p.20Chapter 2.2.2 --- 公共性概念的發展及其雙重屬性 --- p.22Chapter 2.2.3 --- 研究問題 --- p.31Chapter 第3章 --- 研究方法 --- p.34Chapter 3.1 --- 案例描述 --- p.34Chapter 3.1.1 --- 案例背景 --- p.34Chapter 3.1.2 --- 第一階段：內部動員及組織化抗爭 --- p.35Chapter 3.1.3 --- 第二階段：廣泛動員階段 --- p.36Chapter 3.1.4 --- 第三階段：遊行事件及以後 --- p.38Chapter 3.2 --- 個案研究設計 --- p.39Chapter 3.3 --- 數據類型與分析層次 --- p.40Chapter 3.3.1 --- 整體事件分析 --- p.41Chapter 3.3.2 --- 兩種政治及其互動機制的分析 --- p.42Chapter 3.4 --- 研究實施 --- p.43Chapter 3.4.1 --- 架構分析方法與實施 --- p.43Chapter 3.4.2 --- 深度訪談方法與實施 --- p.50Chapter 第4章 --- 抗爭事件的媒體呈現 --- p.55Chapter 4.1 --- 媒體再現：對媒體文本的定量框架分析報告 --- p.55Chapter 4.1.1 --- 主體資格(standing)與框架(framing)指標的對比 --- p.55Chapter 4.1.2 --- 爭奪媒體框架：框架發展與框架鬥爭 --- p.57Chapter 4.2 --- 媒體話語的邊界：關鍵事件的文本分析 --- p.66Chapter 4.2.1 --- 反腐敗話語的擴展 --- p.66Chapter 4.2.2 --- 未被報道的抗爭 --- p.70Chapter 4.3 --- 小結：媒體話語的可視性公共性和參與式公共性 --- p.73Chapter 第5章 --- 環保抗爭政治的話語策略--框架轉換與媒體使用 --- p.75Chapter 5.1 --- 環境抗爭政治的框架轉換 --- p.75Chapter 5.1.1 --- 背景：環保運動與轉型社會 --- p.75Chapter 5.1.2 --- 框架轉換與提升：從鄰避運動到環保運動 --- p.77Chapter 5.1.3 --- 作為話語策略的框架轉換 --- p.82Chapter 5.2 --- 抗爭政治與媒體 --- p.82Chapter 5.2.1 --- 抗爭政治與傳統媒體的互動策略 --- p.83Chapter 5.2.2 --- 抗爭政治的新媒體使用 --- p.89Chapter 5.3 --- 小結：作為媒介化公民的環保抗爭者 --- p.96Chapter 第6章 --- 媒體公共性的建構--抗爭新聞劇目與媒體轉型政治 --- p.99Chapter 6.1 --- 抗爭新聞劇目的概念、表現與生產機制 --- p.99Chapter 6.1.1 --- 媒體與抗爭政治：以事件為中介的互動模式 --- p.99Chapter 6.1.2 --- 製造抗爭新聞劇目：抗爭事件對新聞實踐的形塑 --- p.103Chapter 6.1.3 --- 以事件為中介累積機制的特點、意義及其局限性 --- p.111Chapter 6.2 --- 尋求媒體公共性的媒體轉型政治：“一場重新公共化的運動 --- p.117Chapter 6.2.1 --- 概念提出：媒體轉型政治 --- p.117Chapter 6.2.2 --- 抗爭政治如何作用於媒體轉型政治的“類社會運動實踐 --- p.119Chapter 6.3 --- 小結:兩種公共性模式之外的互動實踐 --- p.125Chapter 第7章 --- 總結與討論 --- p.128Chapter 7.1 --- 威權語境中媒體－抗爭的互動機制 --- p.128Chapter 7.1.1 --- 可視性公共性模式下的互動模式 --- p.129Chapter 7.1.2 --- 參與式公共性模式下的互動模式 --- p.130Chapter 7.1.3 --- 媒體轉型政治與抗爭政治深層互動機制 --- p.131Chapter 7.2 --- 威權語境中公共性的建構 --- p.133Chapter 7.2.1 --- 公共性的建構性 --- p.133Chapter 7.2.2 --- 公共性的矛盾性 --- p.134Chapter 7.3 --- 研究意義、研究不足與研究建議 --- p.135Chapter 7.3.1 --- 公共性建構模式的可推廣性 --- p.135Chapter 7.3.2 --- 公共性建構模式的局限性 --- p.136Chapter 7.3.3 --- 對未來研究的建議 --- p.137參考書目 --- p.13