English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 83091/111984 (74%)
造訪人次 : 21740987      線上人數 : 623
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    政大機構典藏 > 傳播學院 > 傳播博士班 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/119629
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/119629


    題名: 「網絡(networked)公共領域」的意見擴大與深化 ──探索當代「弱公共領域」的運作邏輯
    Logics of the dissemination and deliberation of public opinion in the networked public sphere
    作者: 盧安邦
    Lu, An-Pang
    貢獻者: 臧國仁
    Tsang, Kuo-Jen
    盧安邦
    Lu, An-Pang
    關鍵詞: 大數據
    公共領域
    框架
    議題公眾
    批判實在論
    社群媒體
    Big data
    Public sphere
    Framing
    Issue public
    Critical realism
    Social media
    日期: 2018
    上傳時間: 2018-08-27 15:15:51 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 本文回顧德國思想家Jürgen Habermas之公共領域概念發展進程進而延伸提出「網絡公共領域」(networked public sphere)之想像,由此出發試圖建構一個以各類媒體接續討論公共事務為核心之公共領域研究架構。
    本文鎖定研究問題在「弱公共領域」(weak public sphere),分從意見「擴大」以及「深化」兩個層面探索其運作邏輯。研究方法係以「批判實在論」為方法論基礎並以2016年之「輔仁大學性侵事件」為案例,蒐集臉書以及新聞資料並結合電腦輔助分析方法與質性框架研究進行分析。
    研究發現「網絡公共領域」確實存在,係由議題利害關係人以及意見領袖組成之「議題公眾」生產大量重要論述,其在公共討論過程固然扮演關鍵角色,卻在意見擴大及深化過程受新聞、媒體粉專以及一般粉專之運作邏輯影響以致降低了議題之多元性且過度強調行動者知名度。
    本文因此認為,某些「傳聲者」以及「轉譯者」有助於意見擴散並讓論據權威獲得重視,應將其納入體制設計之一環。
    This paper reviews those literatures concerning Jürgen Habermas’ concept of public sphere and proposes to study the “networked public sphere,” a new form that connects all kinds of media and public discussion taking place in those spheres.
    Further by focusing on the “weak public sphere” and taking the “critical realism” perspective as the main methodological stance, this study combines qualitative framing analysis and the Computational Analysis to explore the logic of dissemination and deliberation of public opinion in the networked public sphere which emerged in a sexual assault case happened in Fu-Jen Catholic University in 2016.
    Through scrutinizing the data on Facebook and news media, the results show that the “network public sphere” do exist. Insiders, consisting of stakeholders and opinion leaders, created a large number of important opinions which unfortunately were often neglected by the news media and Facebook fanpages. Along with increases of dissemination, the level of deliberation decreases, and the significance of one’s fame becomes more prominent.
    This paper then suggests that some “transmitters” and “translators” may help the deliberation of the networked public sphere and foster “the Force of Better Argument” to regain its importance and therefore should be emphasized and included in the system.
    參考文獻: 王石番(1990)。《傳播內容分析法:理論與實證》。台北:幼獅文化。
    王泰俐(2013)。〈「臉書選舉」?2012年台灣總統大選社群媒體對政治參與行為的影響〉。《東吳政治學報》,31(1):1-52。
    毛俞婷、高子航、林宜嫈譯,趙惠淨著(2009)。〈網路、年輕人與臨時自治區〉,《新聞學研究》,101:245-283
    李尚遠譯(2008)。《現代性中的社會想像》,台北:商周。(原書:Charles Taylor. [2004]. Modern Social Imaginaries. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.)
    林宇玲(2014)。〈網路與公共領域:從審議模式轉向多元公眾模式〉。《新聞學研究》,118:55-85
    邱家宜(2015)。〈從「侍從報業論」到「場域理論」〉。《新聞學研究》,122:237-248。
    胡守仁譯(2003)。《連結-讓60億人串在一起的無形網路》,台北:天下文化。(原書:Mark Buchanan. [2003]. Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Science of Networks. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.)
    范純武(2000)。〈兩難之域:公共領域(Public Sphere)在中國近代史研究中的爭議〉,《史耘》,6:171-190。
    施伯燁(2014)。〈社群媒體-使用者研究之概念、方法與方法論初探〉。《傳播研究與實踐》,4 (2):207-227。
    陳啟英、張少樑(2014)。〈從網誌到微網誌:社群媒體應用於政治傳播的長期觀察〉。《資訊傳播研究》,5(1):1-24。
    陳百齡、鄭宇君(2014)。〈從流通到聚合:重大災難期間浮現的資訊頻道〉。《新聞學研究》,121:89-125。
    陳韻如(2011)。〈保護誰的生命?秘魯婦女運動公共議題的新聞框架〉。《新聞學研究》,09:121-166。
    黃啟龍(2002)。〈網路上的公共領域實踐:以弱勢社群網站為例〉,《資訊社會研究》,3:85-111。
    曹衛東等合譯(2002)。《公共領域的結構轉型》。台北:聯經出版社。(原書J. Habermas, [1962]. Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.)
    童世駿譯(2003)。《在事實與規範之間》。北京:生活。(原書J. Habermas, [1992]. Faktizität und Geltung: Beiträge zur Diskeustheorie des Rechts und des demokeatischen Rechtsstaats. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.)
    張錦華(2010)。《傳播批判理論:從解構到主體》,台北:黎明文化。
    張約翰(2015)。〈智慧型行動載具、社群媒體興起後的另類媒體生存-《台灣立報》個案分析〉。《傳播研究與實踐》,5(1):129-155。
    曾繁旭(2009)。〈形成中的媒體市民社會:民間聲音如何影響政策議程〉,《新聞學研究》,100:187-220。
    曾慶豹(1998)。《哈伯瑪斯論》,台北:生智文化事業。
    趙惠淨(2009)。〈網路、年輕人與臨時自治區〉,《新聞學研究》,101: 245-278。
    臧國仁(1998)。〈消息來源組織與媒介真實之建構—組織文化與組織框架的觀點〉。《廣告學研究》,11:69-116。
    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。
    鄧丕雲(1993)。《八零年代台灣學生運動史》。台北:前衛出版社。
    鄧宗聖(2004)。〈誰在近用媒介?初探報紙讀者投書的文化資本生態〉,《中華傳播學刊》,6:195-239。
    謝君蔚、徐美苓(2011)。〈媒體再現科技發展與風險的框架與演變:以基因改造食品新聞為例〉。《中華傳播學刊》,20:143-179。
    蕭遠(2011)。〈網際網路如何影響社會運動中的動員結構與組織型態--以台北野草莓學運為個案研究〉,《台灣民主季刊》,3: 45-85。
    盧沛樺(2012)。《鄉民全都「讚」出來:初探反國光石化運動的青年網路實踐》。台北:政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
    楊意菁(2008)。〈網路民意的公共意涵:公衆、公共領域與溝通審議〉,《中華傳播學刊》,14:115-167。
    劉慧雯(2008)。〈網際網路公共領域角色的反思:以東海劈腿事件與鴻海打壓新聞自由事件為例〉,《新聞學研究》,97:45-81。
    劉世鼎、勞麗珠(2010)。〈網絡作為澳門的另類公共領域〉,《新聞學研究》,102:253-293。
    鄭自隆、莊克仁(2003)。《2003年4月電視新聞節目定期觀察報告》。台北:廣電基金。
    魏玓、劉昌德譯(2001)。《有權無責:英國的報紙與廣電媒體》。台北:國立編譯館。(原書Curran, J. & Seaton, J., [1997]. Power Without Responsibility: The Press and Broadcasting in Britain. United Kingdom, UK: Psychology Press.)
    Abercrombie, N., & Longhurst, B. (1998). Audience: A sociological theory of performance and imagination. London, UK: Sage.
    Albert, R., Jeong, H., & Barabasi, A. (1999). Diameter of the World Wide Web. Nature, 401: 130-131.
    Altheide, D. (2013). Media logic, social control, and fear. Communication Theory, 23, 223-238.
    Ampofo, L., Anstead, N., & O'Loughlin, B. (2011). Trust, confidence, credibility: Citizen responses on Twitter to opinion polls during the 2010 UK general election. Information, Communication and Society, 14 (6), 850-871.
    Ashuri, T. (2012). Activist Journalism:Using digital technologies and undermining structures. Culture& Critique, 5, 38-56.
    Arsène, S. (2008). Online discussions in China: The collaborative development of specific norms for individual expression. China Perspectives [Online], 83-93.
    Backstrom, L., Boldi, P., Rosa, M., Ugander, J. & Vigna, S. (2012). Four degree of separation. Proceedings of the 4th Annual ACM Web Science Conference, 33-42.
    Block, E. (2013). A culturalist approach to the concept of the mediatization of politics: The age of “media hegemony”. Communication Theory, 23, 259-278.
    boyd, D., Golder, S., & Lotan, G. (2010, Jan). Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter. Proceedings of the 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1-10.
    Barton, M. (2005). The future of rational-critical debate in online public spheres. Computers and Composition, 22, 177–190.
    Beckett, C., & Mansell, R. (2008). Crossing boundaries: New media and networked journalism. Communication, Culture & Critique, 1 (1), 92-104.
    Bruns, A. (2008a). Life beyond the public sphere: Towards a networked model for political deliberation. Information Polity, 13, 65-79.
    Bruns, A. (2008b). ‎Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond‎. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
    Bruns, A., Burgess, J., Highfield, T., Kirchhoff, L., & Nicolai, T. (2011). Mapping the Australian Networked Public Sphere. Social Science Computer Review, 29 (3), 277-287.
    Bruns, A., & Highfield, T. (2016). Is Habermas on Twitter? Social media and the public sphere. In Bruns, A, Enli, G, Skogerbø, E. (eds). The Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics. New York: Routledge, pp. 98–130.
    Bucher, T. (2012). Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New media & society, 14(7): 1164–1180.
    Burgess, J. & Bruns, A. (2012). (Not) the Twitter Election: The Dynamics of the #ausvotes Conversation in Relation to the Australian Media Ecology. Journalism Practice, 6(3), 384-402.
    Dahlberg, L. (2004). Cyber-publics and the corporate control of online communication. The Public, 11(3), 77-92.
    Dahlberg, L. (2007). Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: From consensus to contestation. New Media & Society, 9(5), 827-847.
    Dahlgren, P. (2006). Doing citizenship: The cultural origins of civic agency in the public sphere. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(3), 267-286.
    Danermark, B., Ekstrom, M., Jakobsen, L., Karlsson, J., & Bhaskar, R. (2002). Explaining society: Critical realism in the social sciences. London & New York: Rotledge.
    el-Nawawy, M. & Khamis, S. (2010). Collective identity in the virtual Islamic public sphere: Contemporary discourses in two Islamic websites. The International Communication Gazette, 72(3), 229-250.
    Entman, R. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43 (4), 51-58.
    Entman, R. & Rojecki, A. (1993). Freezing out the public elite and media framing of the U.S. anti-nuclear movement. Political Communication, 10, 155-173.
    Farida, V. (2013). Twitter as a reporting tool for breaking news: Journalists tweeting the 2011 UK riots. Digital Journalism, 1, 27­47.
    Fraser, N. (1995). Politics, culture, and the public sphere: Toward a postmodern conception. In L. Nicholson and S. Seidman (Eds.), Social postmodernism: Beyond identity politics (pp. 287-312). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
    Gardiner, M. E. (2004). Wild publics and grotesque symposiums: Habermas and Bakhtin on dialogue, everyday life and the public sphere. In N. Crossly and M. Roberts (Eds.), After Habermas: New Perspectives on the Public Sphere (pp. 28-48). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. London, UK: Harper and Row.
    Graham, T. (2012). Beyond “political” communicative spaces: Talking politics on the wife swap discussion forum. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9, 31-45.
    Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests. Boston: Beacon Press.
    Habermas, J. ( 1984 ). The theory of communicative action, vol. 1: Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
    Habermas, J. ( 1987 ). The theory of communicative action. vol. 2: Lifeworld and
    system : A critique of functionalist reason. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
    Habermas, J. (1998). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory 16: 411–426.
    Habermas, J. (2014). ‘Internet and Public Sphere: What the Web Can’t Do’ interview by Markus Schwering. Retrieved June 17, 2018, from http://www.resetdoc.org/story/00000022437.
    Hanson, N. (1958). Patterns of discovery: An inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press
    Hassid, J. (2012). Safety valve or pressure cooker. Journal of Communication, 62, 212-230.
    Himelboim, I., Sweetser, K., Tinkham, S., Cameron, K., Danelo, M. & West, K. (2014). Valence-based homophily on Twitter network analysis of emotions and political talk in the 2012 presidential election. New Media Society. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/1461444814555096
    Holub, R. C. (1991). Jürgen Habermas: Critic in the Public Sphere. London, UK: Routledge.
    Jarvis, J. (2007, July 5). Networked Journalism. Retrieved from http://buzzmachine.com/2006/07/05/networked-journalism/
    Kim, J., & Kim, E. (2008). Theorizing dialogic deliberation: Everyday political talk as communicative action and dialogue. Communication Theory, 18(1), 51-70.
    Landerer, N. (2013). Rethinking the logics: A conceptual framework for the mediatization of politics. Communication Theory, 23, 259-278.
    Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B. & Gaudet, H. (1948). The People's Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
    Lewis, S., Zamith, R., & Hermida, A.(2013). Content Analysis in an Era of Big Data: A hybrid approach to computational and manual methods. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57(1), 34-52.
    Liu, B. (2012). Sentiment analysis and opinion mining. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies, 5(1), 1-167.
    Liu, C., Jin, G., Liu, Q., Chiu, W., & Yu, Y. (2011). Some chances and challenges in applying language technologies to historical studies in Chinese. International Journal of Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 16(1-2), 27-46.
    Lim, M. (2012). Clicks, Cabs, and Coffee Houses: Social Media and Oppositional Movements in Egypt, 2004–2011. Journal of Communication 62, 231–248
    McCombs, M. (2005). A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies, 6(4), 543-557.
    McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. (1972). The Agenda Setting Function of Mass Media. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187
    Meraz, S., & Papacharissi, Z. (2013). Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #Egypt. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18(2), 1-29.
    Milgram, S. (1967). The small world problem. Psychology Today, 2, 60–67.
    Neuman, W., Guggenheim, L., Jang, S., & Bae, S. (2014). The dynamics of public attention: Agenda-setting theory meets big data. Journal of Communication, 64, 193–214.
    Nip, J., Fu, K. (2016). Networked framing between source posts and their reposts: an analysis of public opinion on China's microblogs. Information, Communication and Society, 19(8), 1127-1149.
    Nisbet, M. (2009). Knowledge into action: Framing the debates over climate change and poverty. In P. D’Angelo & J. Kuypers (Eds.), Doing news framing analysis: Empirical, theoretical, and normative perspectives (pp. 43-83). New York, NY: Routledge.
    Papacharissi, Z. (2010). A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
    Papacharissi, Z., & de Fatima Oliveira, M. (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 266-282.
    Putnam. R. D. (2001). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
    Recuber, T. (2015). Occupy empathy? Online politics and micro-narratives of suffering. New Media & Society, 17, 62-77.
    Rheingold, H. (2007). Habermas blows off question about the Internet and the Public Sphere. Smart Mob, published online 5 November 2007. Retrieved June 17, 2018, from http://www.smartmobs.com/2007/11/05/habermas-blows-off-question-about-the-internet-and-the-public-sphere/
    Rhiengold, H. (2012). Net smart: How to thrive online. London, UK: The MIT Press.
    Ruiz, C., Domingo, D., Micó, J., Díaz-Noci, J., Meso, K. & Masip, P. (2011). Public sphere 2.0: The democratic qualities of citizen debates in online newspapers. The International Journal of Press/ Politics, 16(4), 463–487.
    Shklovski, I., & Valtysson, B. (2012). Secretly political civic engagement in online publics in Kazakhstan. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(3), 417–433.
    Sima, Y. (2011). Grassroots environmental activism and the internet: Constructing a green public sphere in China. Asian Studies Review, 35, 477-497.
    Singer, J. (2014). User-generated visibility: Secondary gatekeeping in a shared media space. New Media & Society, 16(1), 55-73.
    Smith, K., Moriarty, S., Barbatsis, G., Kenney, K. (2005). Handbook of visual communication: Theory, method, and media . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Song, Y. (2007). Internet news media and issue development: A case study on the roles of independent online news services as agenda-builders for anti-US protests in South Korea. New media & Society, 9(1), 71-92.
    Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492-1512.
    Stubbs, M. (2001). Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. New York, NY: Blackwell Publishers.
    Trenz, H. (2009). Digital media and the return of the representative public sphere. Javnost-the public, 16(1), 33-46.
    Tufekci, Z., &Wilson, C. (2012). Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 363-379.
    van Dijck, J. (2009). Users like you? Theorizing agency in user-generated content. Media, Culture & Society, 31(1), 41-58.
    van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford, UK: University Press.
    Wan, X. (2009, August). Co-training for cross-lingual sentiment classification. Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP, 1, 235-243.
    Weber. M. (1997). The methodology of the social sciences. (Edward A. Shils & Henry A. Finch, Trans. & Eds.). New York, NY: Free Press. (Original work published in 1949)
    Wright, S. (2012). From third place to third space: Everyday political talk in non-political online spaces. Javnost - the public, 19(3), 5-20.
    Xing, G. (2012). Online activism and counter-public spheres. Javnost - The Public, 19(2), 63-82.
    Zhou, Y. & Moy, P. (2007). Parsing framing processes: The interplay between online public opinion and media coverage. Journal of Communication, 57, 79-98.
    描述: 博士
    國立政治大學
    傳播學院博士班
    98451502
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098451502
    資料類型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/DIS.NCCU.PDC.003.2018.F05
    顯示於類別:[傳播博士班] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    150201.pdf2453KbAdobe PDF58檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋