| dc.contributor | 新聞系 | - |
| dc.creator (作者) | 劉嘉薇 | - |
| dc.creator (作者) | Liu, Jia-Wei | - |
| dc.date (日期) | 2016-03 | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2-Mar-2021 14:47:48 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 2-Mar-2021 14:47:48 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 2-Mar-2021 14:47:48 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/134156 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 2011年7月27日發生溫州動車追撞事件，相關新聞在中國大陸受到封鎖，而網民仍能克服限制，在網路上傳播此一訊息並表達訴求，中國大陸是一個在制度與意識形態方面，皆與自由民主社會相異的政權，在此種體制之下，落實責任政治的方式有別於民主國家嗎？在溫州動車事件中，中國大陸運用了各種方法達到問責，然在此回應過程中，不能違背黨的價值，這屬於中國式的問責。面對網路的各種言論，其維持社會穩定的方法也有別於民主國家。在問責方面，官方主要的作法包括撤換官員、成立調查小組、說明事故經過、澄清搜救過程和順序的合理性、對一次死亡30人以上的特別重大事故起數實行零控制、表達對事件的哀痛之意等方式回應民意。另一方面，政府的控制手段也幾乎不曾停止，包括下令媒體「使用當局發布的資訊」，再實施網路實名制，維持社會穩定。相同的是，中國大陸政府如同民主國家，雖會為自己化妝，但也會置換官員，甚至避免說錯話。民主國家的問責可以得民心，而以控制回應民意，卻可能失民心，因為控制將可能積累更多言論的「暗潮」，若能將民眾的意見表達納入施政建議，將可獲致更多的認同與信任，「至於你信不信，我反正信了」！ | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | On July 27, 2011 when the high-speed train collision occurred in Wenzhou, news related to the event was blocked in Mainland China, netizens nonetheless overcame the restrictions and were able to spread the news about the incident and express their appeal. Mainland China is a regime whose systems and ideologies are at odds with democratic society. Under such system, will the implementation of government accountability be different from other democratic nations? During the Wenzhou high-speed train incident, Mainland China has used various methods to achieve accountability, yet within the boundary that values of the Party cannot be violated throughout the response process. In handling the various network discussions, China’s approaches in maintaining social stability were also different from democratic nations. In terms of accountability, the approaches taken by the authorities in responding to the public primarily included replacement of officials, set up of an inquiry group, explanation of incident details, clarification of the rescue process and justification of its sequence, implementation of zero controls for future major incidents involving fatality of 30 people and more, and expression of condolences about the incident. On the other hand, control measures of government seemed never halted once, including ordering the media to “use news published by authorities”, implementation of a real-name system for Internet access to maintain social stability. Accountability in democratic nations can win the trust of the people, whereas accountability achieved through control may lose popular support. This is because controls can build up undercurrents to more discontent, whereas more support and trust will be won if the opinions of the public are included into policy suggestions. In this regard, “I believe it, whether you do or not”! | - |
| dc.format.extent | 753463 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 中國行政評論, 22卷1期, 1-34 | - |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 互聯網 ; 微博 ; 網民 ; 問責 ; 溫州動車 ; 互聯網 ; 微博 ; 網民 ; 問責 ; 溫州動車 | - |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Internet ; weibo ; netizen ; accountability ; Wenzhou High-Speed Train | - |
| dc.title (題名) | 至於你信不信，我反正信了」：中國大陸2011年溫州動車追撞事件網路意見表達與政府回應 | - |
| dc.title (題名) | “I Believe it, Whether You Do or not”: Online Opinions and the Government Response to the 2011 Wenzhou High-Speed Train Collision in Mainland China | - |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | - |
| dc.identifier.doi (DOI) | 10.6635/cpar.2016.22(1).01 | - |
| dc.doi.uri (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.6635/cpar.2016.22(1).01 | - |
