1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. 傳播學院
  4. 學位論文
  5. Item

學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

題名 從爭議性政治新聞探討客觀報導與事實建構
作者 鄧麗萍
Tang, Lee Ping
貢獻者 羅文輝
鄧麗萍
Tang, Lee Ping
關鍵詞 客觀報導
事實建構
政治新聞
框架
日期 2004
上傳時間 11-九月-2009 16:21:25 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究的主要目的是探討不同的報紙在報導爭議性政治新聞時，如何實踐客觀報導原則，以及不同政黨立場的報紙在爭議性政治新聞的事實建構上是否呈現差異。研究以「319槍擊案」事件為個案分析，並採用內容分析法及框架分析進行實證資料探討。
     
     在客觀報導部份，本研究從文獻檢閱的過程中歸納出五項客觀報導原則，包括倒金字塔式純淨新聞形式、平衡報導、消息來源可追溯性、中性陳述的新聞呈現方式，以及中立的新聞立場等。研究發現，各報在報導「319槍擊案」事件時，特稿、新聞分析等表達意見的新聞形式，以及夾議夾敘的純淨新聞比例相當高，同時，各報也經常引用不明確或匿名的消息來源，不符合客觀報導原則。各報在報導「319槍擊案」事件時，新聞立場上呈現明顯差異。被認為傾向泛綠陣營的報紙，均採取有利於泛綠陣營的立場；相對的，被認為傾向於泛藍陣營的報紙，則採取不利於泛綠陣營的新聞立場。因此，新聞立場似乎是衡量不同報紙實踐客觀報導的最適當標準。
     
     在事實建構部份，本研究以框架分析探討不同政黨立場的報紙對新聞主題、消息來源策略和新聞框架的選擇，發現各報傾向以爭議性的新聞主題建構「319槍擊案」的新聞事實，而不同政黨立場的報紙即使選擇同樣的新聞框架，在框架論點上仍呈現出與其政黨立場相符的新聞事實。在消息來源方面，除了蘋果日報，其餘四家報紙在一則新聞中同時引用對當事人陳水扁、呂秀蓮持正面與負面立場的消息來源之比例很低。各報在處理正反意見時，多半以兩則新聞在版面上並陳的區隔方式來呈現，而非傳統新聞學強調在同一則新聞中呈現正反意見的形式。這種做法相信與國內報紙的新聞採訪路線設置有關，已成為國內報紙處理爭議性政治新聞的特色。
This study attempts to analyze the media performance and news representation of critical issues related to political news in newspapers which embraced different kind of political position. Taking “319 Shooting” incident as a critical example, this study tries to examine how did the local newspapers from different political stand implement objective reporting and construct news facts? How did the newspapers address these issues?
     
     The methodology includes content analysis and frame analysis. Content analysis aims to examine the application of objective reporting from different newspaper. Frame analysis aims to investigate the construction and manufacturing of news facts in “319 Shooting” incident. The research gathers news reports that relate to six critical period of “319 Shooting” investigation and manages to get 631 pieces of news report.
     
     The results of content analysis show that five papers implemented objective reporting in different degree. Political stand could be considered as the key factor in the implementation of objective reporting. Papers which regarded as pro-pan-green camp were proved to produce news reports that were obviously biased to pan-green camp, whereas papers which regarded as pro-pan-blue camp showed the same political tendency in their news reporting.
     
     On the other hand, the results of frame analyses imply that profession news frame is the most covered in the news. Under the same news frame, papers from different political stand tended to select the frame arguments which can fulfill their political position. Besides investigators, pan-green and pan-blue camps’ supporters were given the larger spaces as news source in the five papers.
參考文獻 中文部份
《工商時報》（2004年12月20日）。〈共同聲明〉，第3版。
王石番（1991）。《傳播內容分析法：理論與實證》。台北：幼獅。
王健壯（2004年7月17日）。〈二減一不等於四〉，《中國時報》，第E7版。
《世界日報》（2004年11月15日）。〈美國有線電視頻道 意見新聞充斥〉，第3版。
李利國、黃淑敏譯（1995）。《當代新聞採訪與寫作》，台北：周知文化。( 原書
Brooks, B.S., Kennedy, G., Moen, D.R., Ranly, D. (1997). News reporting and writing. New York: St. Martin`s Press.
李婉婷（1997）。《媒體對選擇新聞的報導偏差性分析─以民國八十三年台北市長
選舉為例》。國立政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
吳芳如（2002）。《消息來源、新聞框架與媒介真實之建構──以政黨輪替後之核
四爭議案為例》。世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。
Berelson﹐B.（1952）.Content Analysis in Communication Research. Glencoe﹐Illinois: The Free Press.
Black, J., Steele, B., & Barney, R. (1993). Doing ethics in journalism: A handbook with case studies. Greencastle, IN: Sigma Delta Chi Foundation and The Society of Professional Journalists.
Blankenburg, W.B., & Walden, R. (1977). Objectivity, interpretation and economy in reporting. Journalism Quarterly, 54, 591-595.
Callaghab, K., & Schnell, F. (2001). Assessing the democratic debate: How the news media frame elite policy discourse. Political Communication, 18, 183-212.
Carey, J. W. (1983). Technology and ideology: The case of the telegraph. Prospects, 9, 303-328.
Carey, J.W. (1989). Communication as culture. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
Cohen, S., & Young, J. (1981). Models of the presentation. In S. Cohen & J. Young (Eds.), The manufacture of news: Social problems, deviance and the mass media(pp.159-168). London: Constable.
Comstock, G. (1988). Today’s audience, tomorrow’s media. In O. Oskamp(Eds.), Television and human behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.
Condit, C. M., & Selzer, J. A. (1985). The rhetoric of objectivity in the newspaper coverage of a murder trial. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, vol.2(3), 197-216.
Cunningham, Brent. (2003). Rethinking objective journalism. Columbia Journalism Review,(July-August). Retrieved July 9, 2003, from
Lichtenberg, J. (1991). In defense of objectivity. In J. Curan & M. Garevitch(Eds.), Mass Media & Society (pp. 216-231). New York: Edward Arnold.
http://www.cjr.org/issues/2003/4/objective-cunningham.asp
Dennis, E. E., & Merrill, J. C. (1991). Media debates: Issues in mass communication. New York: Longman.
Donsbach, W., & Klett, B. (1993). Subjective objectivity: How journalists in four countries define a key term of their profession. Gazette, 51: 53-83.
Durham, M. G. (1998). On the Relevance of Standpoint Epistemology to the Practice of Journalism: The Case for “Strong Objectivity”. Communication Theory, 8(2), 117-140.
Entman, R. M. (1989). Democracy without citizens: Media and decay of American politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.
Fico, F., & Cote, W. (1999). Fairness and balance in the structural characteristics of newspaper stories on the 1996 presidential election. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 76(1), 124-137.
Friedman, Ted. (1998). From heroic objectivity to the news stream: The newseum`s strategies for relegitimizing journalism in the information age. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 15(3), 325-335.
Gamson, W. A., et al. (1992). Media images and the social construction of reality. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 373-393.
Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1-37.
Lippmann, W. (1965). Public opinion. New York: Free Press.
Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS evening news, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. New York: Vintage Books.
Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. Beverly, CA: University of California Press.
Glasgow Media Group (1976). Bad news. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Glasser, T.L. (1984). Objectivity precludes responsibility. The Quill. Feb, 13-16.
Hackett, R. (1984). Decline of a paradigm? Bias and objectivity in new media studies. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 1, 229–259.
Hackett, R. A., & Zhao, Yuezhi. (1998). Sustaining democracy? Journalism and the politics of objectivity. Toronto: Garamond.
Hemanus, P. (1976). Objectivity in news transmission. Journal of Communication, 26(4), 102-107.
Hess, J. D. (1984). The government / press connection. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Holbert, R. L., & Zubric, S. J. (2000). A comparative analysis: Objective & public journalism techniques. Newspaper Research Journal, 21(4), 50-67.
Hindman, E. B. (1998). Spectacles of the poor: Conventions of alternative news. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly; 75(1), 177-193.
McDonald, D. (1975). Is objective possible? In J. C. Merrill & B. Ralph (Eds.), Ethics and the press. New York: Hastings House.
Iggers, J. (1998). Good news, bad news. Journalism ethics and the public interest. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Janowitz, M. (1975). Professional models in journalism: The gatekeeper and the advocate. Journalism Quarterly, 52, 618-626, 662.
Kieran, M. (1998). Media ethics: A philosophical approach. London: Routledge.
Kocher, R. (1986). Bloodhounds or missionaries: Role definitions of German and British journalists. European Journal of Communication, 1(1), 43-64.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lambeth, E. B. (1992). Committed journalism: An ethic for the profession. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Lang, G.. E., & Lang, K. (1981). Watergate: An exploration of the agenda-building process. In G.. C. Wilhoit & H. de Bock (Eds.), Mass Communication Review Yearbook, 2: 447-468.
Reeb, R. H. Jr. (1999). Taking journalism seriously: "Objectivity" as a partisan cause. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc.
McLean, E. (1981). Between the lines. Montreal: Black Rose Books.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York : McGraw-Hill.
McQuail, D. (1983). Mass Communication Theory. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
McQuail, D. (1992). Media performance: Mass communication and the public interest. London: Sage.
Merrill, J. C. (1997). Journalism ethics: Philosophical foundations for news media. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Merrill, J. C. (1984). Journalistic objectivity is not possible. In E. E. Dennis & J. C. Merrill (Eds.), Basic issues in mass communication: A debate (pp. 104–110). New York: Macmillan.
Meyer, P. (2005.1.12). Closely watched media humbled. USA Today，取自http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-01-12-meyer_x.htm
吳燕玲、陶令瑜（2000）。〈黎智英：我們不是賣雜誌，我們是賣共鳴、賣感覺！〉 ，
Mindich, D. T. Z.(1998). Just the facts: How "objectivity" came to define American journalism. New York: New York University Press.
Mirando, J. A. (2001). Embracing objectivity early on: Journalism textbooks of the 1800s. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 16(1), 23-32.
Meyer, P. (2005). Closely watched media humbled. USA Today. Retrieved January
12, 2005, from
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-01-12-meyer_x.htm
Neimeyer, G. J. (1993). Constructivist assessment: A casebook. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ognianova, E., & Endersby, J. W. (1996). Objectivity revisited: A spatial model of political ideology and mass communication. Journalism and Mass Communication Monographs, vol. 159.
Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55-75.
Patterson, T. E., & Donsbach, W. (1996). News decisions: Journalists as partisan actors. Political Communication, vol. 13 (4), 455-468.
Philips, E. B. (1977). Approaches to objectivity. In P. M. Hirsch (Eds.), Strategies for communication research (pp. 63-78). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
《新新聞周報》，742：30–37。
Pottker, H. (2004). Objectivity as (self-)censorship: Against the dogmatisation of professional ethics in journalism. The Public, 11(2), 83-94.
Roscho, B. (1975). Newsmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ryan, M. (2001). Journalistic ethics, objectivity, existential journalism, standpoint epistemology, and public journalism. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 16(1), 3-22.
Schiller, D. (1981). Objectivity and the news. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the news: A social history of American newspapers. New York: Basic Books.
Schudson, M. (1990). Origins of the ideal of objectivity in the professions : Studies in the history of American journalism and American law, 1830-1940. New York: Garland.
Shaw, D. (1967). News bias and the telegraph: A study of historical change. Journalism Quarterly, 44, 3-12.
Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1991). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content. New York: Longman.
Smith, A. (1980). Is objectivity obsolete? Journalists lost their innocence in the seventies—and gained new voices for the eighties. Columbia Journalism Review, May–June, 61–65.
Staab, J. F. (1990). The role of news factors in news selection: A theoretical reconsideration. European Journal of Communication, 5, 423-443.
林元輝（2004）。〈本土學術史的「新聞」概念流變〉，收錄於翁秀琪主編，《台灣傳播學的想像》。台北：五南。頁055-084。
Stensaas, H. S. (1986). Development of the objectivity ethic in U.S. daily newspaper. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 2 (1), 50-60.
Stoker, K. (1995). Existential objectivity: Freeing journalists to be ethical. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 10 (1), 5-22.
Streckfuss, R. (1990). Objectivity in journalism: A search and a reassessment. Journalism Quarterly, 67 (4), 973-983.
Tuchman, G. (1999). Objectivity as strategic ritual: An examination of newsmen’s notion of objectivity. In H. Tumber (Eds.), News: A reader (pp. 297-307). New York: Oxford University Press.
Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: Free Press.
Udick, R. (1993). The Hutchins paradox: Objectivity versus diversity. Mass Communication Review, 20, 148-157.
Westerstahl, J. (1983). Objective news reporting. Communication Research, 10, 403-424.
Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2000). Mass media research: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
林照真（1987）。《從新聞報導實例探討新聞客觀性之體現》。國立政治大學新聞
研究所碩士論文。
林昱廷（2004）。《「非常報導」光碟議題建構與新聞框架分析—以中時、自由、
聯合報為例》。國立臺灣師範大學大眾傳播研究所碩士論文。
施盈廷（2003）。〈資訊時代的新聞概念──小寫新聞的誕生〉，《資訊社會研究》，
4：181-210。
紀慧君（2003）。《建構新聞事實：定位與權力》。國立政治大學新聞研究所博士
論文。
姚人多（2005）。〈藍綠政治力下的媒體亂象何時了〉，台灣記協2004年新聞年報。
翁秀琪、鍾蔚文、簡妙如、邱承君（1999）。〈似假還真的新聞文本世界：新聞如
何呈現超經驗事件〉，《新聞學研究》，第58期。
陳順孝（2002）。〈客觀報導與春秋筆法——探索華人新聞報導的「使用理論」〉，
「中華傳播學會2002年會」論文。台北：深坑。
陳順孝（2003）。《新聞控制與反控制：「記實避禍」的報導策略》。台北：五南。
馮建三（2004）。〈渴望「正常資本主義國家」的八天：分析五家日報2004年總
統大選後的新聞〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》，54：277-290。
黃新生（1994）。〈新聞客觀性：一個渺茫，但值得追求的目標〉，臧國仁（編）。《新聞學與術的對話》，頁43-44。台北：國立政治大學新聞研究所。
黃厚銘（2001）。《虛擬社區中的身分認同與信任》。國立台灣大學社會學博士論
文。
黃惠鈴（1997）。《報紙如何報導總統選舉新聞：聯合報、自由時報與中央日報的比較分析》。國立政治大學新聞所碩士論文。
黃美惠（2001）。《媒介建構之女性參政框架—─以副總統呂秀蓮的新聞報導為例》。淡江大學大眾傳播學系傳播碩士班碩士論文。
彭家發（1994）。《新聞客觀性原理》。台北：三民。
彭湘怡（2004）。〈AC尼爾森調查：蘋果「昨日」與「過去7天」閱讀率皆排第2〉。《銘報即時新聞》。上網日期：2004年11月1日，取自http://mol.mcu.edu.tw/show.php?nid=39283
管中祥（2004）。〈政黨立場明顯 看不到公民立場〉，媒體改造論壇。上網日期：2004年3月15日，取自http://twmedia.org/archives/000694.html
張甄薇（1992）。《衝突性社會議題之新聞框架研究-以台灣政治反對運動為例（1960-1991）》。輔大大眾傳播研究所碩士論文。
財團法人新聞公害防治基金會（2004年3月）。〈「陳由豪政治獻金事件」新聞處理分析〉，新聞公害防治基金會報紙觀察報告(四)。
趙眉（1999）。〈新聞與文學：重讀海明威〉，《傳媒透視》，取自http://www.rthk.org.hk/mediadigest/md9910/08.html
《銘傳即時新聞》（2005年3月2日）。〈台灣日報推動台灣正名辦捐報〉，上網日期：2005年3月2日，取自http://mol.mcu.edu.tw/show.php?nid=46314
鄭瑞城（1991）。〈從消息來源途徑詮釋媒介近用權：台灣的驗證〉。《新聞學研究》，
第45期。
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。
臧國仁、鍾蔚文 ( 1997 )。〈框架概念與公共關係策略----有關運用媒介框架的探析〉，《廣告學研究》，9：99-130。
韓享良（2002）。《國內報紙內容對失業議題之報導框架研究—─以聯合報、中國時報、自由時報為例》。世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。
羅文輝（1985）。〈客觀與新聞報導〉，《報學》第7卷，第5期，頁110-116。
羅文輝（1991）。《精確新聞報導》。台北：正中。
羅文輝、鍾蔚文（1992）。〈報紙與電視如何報導民國八十年的第二屆國代選舉〉，《亞洲協會專題研究報告》。
羅文輝、法治斌（1993）。〈客觀報導與誹謗〉，《中文傳播研究論述》，頁285-310。台北：政大傳播學院研究中心。
羅文輝、黃葳葳（2000）。《報紙與電視總統選舉新聞的比較研究》。聯合報系文化基金會專題研究報告。
羅文輝、侯志欽（2004）。〈2004年電視總統選舉新聞的政黨偏差〉，「數位化時代與新聞報導研討會」論文。台北：台灣大學新聞研究所。
羅世宏（1994）。《後蔣經國時代的國家、大眾媒介與反對運動：國家認同議題的媒介框架分析》。國立政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
鍾蔚文（1992）。《從媒介真實到主觀真實：看新聞，怎麼看？看到什麼？》。台北：正中。
英文部份
Allan, S. (1997). News and the public sphere: Towards a history of objectivity and impartiality. In M. Bromley & T. O’Malley(Eds.), A journalism reader (pp. 296-329). New York: Routledge.
Altheide, D. L. (1976). Creating reality: How TV news distorts events. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Altschull, J. H. (1984). Agents of power: The role of the news media in human affairs. New York: Longman.
Bantimaroundis, P., & Ban, H. (2001). Covering the crisis in Somalia: Framing choices by the New York Times and the Manchester Guardian. In S. D. Reese, et al. (Eds.), Framing public life. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bogart, L. (1989). Press and public. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
Becker, L. C. (1991). Impartiality and ethical theory. Ethics, 101, 698-700.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
新聞研究所
91451028
93
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0914510281
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 羅文輝zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) 鄧麗萍zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) Tang, Lee Pingen_US
dc.creator (作者) 鄧麗萍zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Tang, Lee Pingen_US
dc.date (日期) 2004en_US
dc.date.accessioned 11-九月-2009 16:21:25 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 11-九月-2009 16:21:25 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 11-九月-2009 16:21:25 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0914510281en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/29812-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 新聞研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 91451028zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 93zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究的主要目的是探討不同的報紙在報導爭議性政治新聞時，如何實踐客觀報導原則，以及不同政黨立場的報紙在爭議性政治新聞的事實建構上是否呈現差異。研究以「319槍擊案」事件為個案分析，並採用內容分析法及框架分析進行實證資料探討。
     
     在客觀報導部份，本研究從文獻檢閱的過程中歸納出五項客觀報導原則，包括倒金字塔式純淨新聞形式、平衡報導、消息來源可追溯性、中性陳述的新聞呈現方式，以及中立的新聞立場等。研究發現，各報在報導「319槍擊案」事件時，特稿、新聞分析等表達意見的新聞形式，以及夾議夾敘的純淨新聞比例相當高，同時，各報也經常引用不明確或匿名的消息來源，不符合客觀報導原則。各報在報導「319槍擊案」事件時，新聞立場上呈現明顯差異。被認為傾向泛綠陣營的報紙，均採取有利於泛綠陣營的立場；相對的，被認為傾向於泛藍陣營的報紙，則採取不利於泛綠陣營的新聞立場。因此，新聞立場似乎是衡量不同報紙實踐客觀報導的最適當標準。
     
     在事實建構部份，本研究以框架分析探討不同政黨立場的報紙對新聞主題、消息來源策略和新聞框架的選擇，發現各報傾向以爭議性的新聞主題建構「319槍擊案」的新聞事實，而不同政黨立場的報紙即使選擇同樣的新聞框架，在框架論點上仍呈現出與其政黨立場相符的新聞事實。在消息來源方面，除了蘋果日報，其餘四家報紙在一則新聞中同時引用對當事人陳水扁、呂秀蓮持正面與負面立場的消息來源之比例很低。各報在處理正反意見時，多半以兩則新聞在版面上並陳的區隔方式來呈現，而非傳統新聞學強調在同一則新聞中呈現正反意見的形式。這種做法相信與國內報紙的新聞採訪路線設置有關，已成為國內報紙處理爭議性政治新聞的特色。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) This study attempts to analyze the media performance and news representation of critical issues related to political news in newspapers which embraced different kind of political position. Taking “319 Shooting” incident as a critical example, this study tries to examine how did the local newspapers from different political stand implement objective reporting and construct news facts? How did the newspapers address these issues?
     
     The methodology includes content analysis and frame analysis. Content analysis aims to examine the application of objective reporting from different newspaper. Frame analysis aims to investigate the construction and manufacturing of news facts in “319 Shooting” incident. The research gathers news reports that relate to six critical period of “319 Shooting” investigation and manages to get 631 pieces of news report.
     
     The results of content analysis show that five papers implemented objective reporting in different degree. Political stand could be considered as the key factor in the implementation of objective reporting. Papers which regarded as pro-pan-green camp were proved to produce news reports that were obviously biased to pan-green camp, whereas papers which regarded as pro-pan-blue camp showed the same political tendency in their news reporting.
     
     On the other hand, the results of frame analyses imply that profession news frame is the most covered in the news. Under the same news frame, papers from different political stand tended to select the frame arguments which can fulfill their political position. Besides investigators, pan-green and pan-blue camps’ supporters were given the larger spaces as news source in the five papers.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論
     第一節 研究動機 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 01
     第二節 研究問題 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 05
     第三節 研究價值 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 07
     第四節 章節安排 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
     
     第二章 文獻探討
     第一節 新聞客觀性的起源與演變 ----------------------------------------------------- 13
     第二節 新聞客觀性的爭議 ----------------------------------------------------------- 18
     第三節 新聞客觀性概念與實踐方法 ----------------------------------------------- 29
     第四節 客觀報導與事實建構 ----------------------------------------------------------- 37
     第五節 新聞框架與研究取向 ----------------------------------------------------------- 42
     第六節 研究架構及研究問題 ----------------------------------------------------------- 50
     
     第三章 研究方法
     第一節 研究設計 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 53
     第二節 研究方法 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 60
     第三節 個案選擇 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 62
     第四節 類目建構 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 66
     第五節 資料處理 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 82
     
     第四章 資料分析結果
     第一節 報紙在「319槍擊案」事件上的客觀報導呈現 ---------------------------- 83
     第二節 不同報紙在報導「319槍擊案」事件上的客觀報導呈現 ---------------- 90
     第三節 報紙在報導「319槍擊案」事件上的事實建構方式 ---------------------- 98
     第四節 不同政黨立場的報紙對「319槍擊案」事件的事實建構方式 ---------- 103
     
     第五章 研究結論與建議
     第一節 本研究主要發現 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 113
     第二節 綜合討論 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 121
     第三節 研究限制與建議 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 127
     
     
     參考書目
     一、中文部份 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 131
     二、英文部份 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 133
     
     附錄
     附錄一 本研究編碼類目表 ----------------------------------------------------------- 139
     圖表目錄
     
     
     圖2-1 客觀性概念的架構 ----------------------------------------------------------- 30
     圖3-1 本研究方法架構圖 ----------------------------------------------------------- 61
     表3-1 「319槍擊案」大事紀 ----------------------------------------------------------- 63
     表3-2 新聞文本抽樣日期 ----------------------------------------------------------- 65
     表3-3 客觀與立場類目及說明 ----------------------------------------------------- 67
     表3-4 新聞內容類目及說明 ----------------------------------------------------------- 70
     表4-1 「319槍擊案」事件不同報紙新聞則數與字數分佈表 ---------------- 84
     表4-2 「319槍擊案」事件新聞形式的則數與字數分佈表 ---------------------- 84
     表4-3 「319槍擊案」事件平衡報導的則數與字數分佈表 ---------------------- 85
     表4-4 「319槍擊案」事件可追溯性的則數與字數分佈表 ---------------------- 86
     表4-5 「319槍擊案」事件純淨新聞呈現的則數與字數分佈表 ---------------- 87
     表4-6 「319槍擊案」事件新聞立場的則數與字數分佈表 ---------------------- 87
     表4-7 「319槍擊案」事件不同報紙在新聞形式方面的則數與字數
     分佈表 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 91
     表4-8 「319槍擊案」事件不同報紙在平衡報導方面的則數與字數
     分佈表 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 92
     表4-9 「319槍擊案」事件不同報紙消息來源可追溯性的則數與
     字數分佈表 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 93
     表4-10 「319槍擊案」事件不同報紙在純淨新聞呈現方面的則數與
     字數分佈表 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 94
     表4-11 「319槍擊案」事件不同報紙在新聞立場方面的則數與字數分佈表 -- 95
     表4-12 「319槍擊案」事件不同新聞主題的則數與字數分佈表 ----------------- 98
     表4-13 「319槍擊案」事件新聞主體框架的則數與字數分佈表 ----------------- 99
     表4-14 「319槍擊案」事件主要消息來源身份的則數與字數分佈表 ----------- 100
     表4-15 「319槍擊案」事件消息來源立場的則數與字數分佈表 ----------------- 101
     表4-16 「319槍擊案」事件不同政黨立場的報紙與主要消息來源
     身份分佈表 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 104
     表4-17 「319槍擊案」事件不同政黨立場的報紙與主要消息來源
     立場分佈表 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 105
     表4-18 「319槍擊案」事件不同政黨立場的報紙與新聞主題類型分佈表 ----- 106
     表4-19 「319槍擊案」事件不同政黨立場的新聞媒體與新聞框架分佈表 ----- 107
     表4-20 「319槍擊案」事件不同政黨立場的報紙與政治框架論點分佈表 ----- 108
     表4-21 「319槍擊案」事件不同政黨立場的報紙與專業框架論點分佈表 ----- 109
     表4-22 「319槍擊案」事件不同政黨立場的報紙與司法框架論點分佈表 ----- 109
     表4-23 「319槍擊案」事件不同政黨立場的報紙與社會框架論點分佈表 ----- 110		zh_TW
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0914510281en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 客觀報導zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 事實建構zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 政治新聞zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 框架zh_TW
dc.title (題名) 從爭議性政治新聞探討客觀報導與事實建構zh_TW
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部份zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 《工商時報》（2004年12月20日）。〈共同聲明〉，第3版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 王石番（1991）。《傳播內容分析法：理論與實證》。台北：幼獅。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 王健壯（2004年7月17日）。〈二減一不等於四〉，《中國時報》，第E7版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 《世界日報》（2004年11月15日）。〈美國有線電視頻道 意見新聞充斥〉，第3版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李利國、黃淑敏譯（1995）。《當代新聞採訪與寫作》，台北：周知文化。( 原書zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Brooks, B.S., Kennedy, G., Moen, D.R., Ranly, D. (1997). News reporting and writing. New York: St. Martin`s Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李婉婷（1997）。《媒體對選擇新聞的報導偏差性分析─以民國八十三年台北市長zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 選舉為例》。國立政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 吳芳如（2002）。《消息來源、新聞框架與媒介真實之建構──以政黨輪替後之核zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 四爭議案為例》。世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Berelson﹐B.（1952）.Content Analysis in Communication Research. Glencoe﹐Illinois: The Free Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Black, J., Steele, B., & Barney, R. (1993). Doing ethics in journalism: A handbook with case studies. Greencastle, IN: Sigma Delta Chi Foundation and The Society of Professional Journalists.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Blankenburg, W.B., & Walden, R. (1977). Objectivity, interpretation and economy in reporting. Journalism Quarterly, 54, 591-595.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Callaghab, K., & Schnell, F. (2001). Assessing the democratic debate: How the news media frame elite policy discourse. Political Communication, 18, 183-212.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Carey, J. W. (1983). Technology and ideology: The case of the telegraph. Prospects, 9, 303-328.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Carey, J.W. (1989). Communication as culture. Boston: Unwin Hyman.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cohen, S., & Young, J. (1981). Models of the presentation. In S. Cohen & J. Young (Eds.), The manufacture of news: Social problems, deviance and the mass media(pp.159-168). London: Constable.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Comstock, G. (1988). Today’s audience, tomorrow’s media. In O. Oskamp(Eds.), Television and human behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Condit, C. M., & Selzer, J. A. (1985). The rhetoric of objectivity in the newspaper coverage of a murder trial. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, vol.2(3), 197-216.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cunningham, Brent. (2003). Rethinking objective journalism. Columbia Journalism Review,(July-August). Retrieved July 9, 2003, fromzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lichtenberg, J. (1991). In defense of objectivity. In J. Curan & M. Garevitch(Eds.), Mass Media & Society (pp. 216-231). New York: Edward Arnold.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) http://www.cjr.org/issues/2003/4/objective-cunningham.aspzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dennis, E. E., & Merrill, J. C. (1991). Media debates: Issues in mass communication. New York: Longman.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Donsbach, W., & Klett, B. (1993). Subjective objectivity: How journalists in four countries define a key term of their profession. Gazette, 51: 53-83.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Durham, M. G. (1998). On the Relevance of Standpoint Epistemology to the Practice of Journalism: The Case for “Strong Objectivity”. Communication Theory, 8(2), 117-140.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Entman, R. M. (1989). Democracy without citizens: Media and decay of American politics. New York: Oxford University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Fico, F., & Cote, W. (1999). Fairness and balance in the structural characteristics of newspaper stories on the 1996 presidential election. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 76(1), 124-137.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Friedman, Ted. (1998). From heroic objectivity to the news stream: The newseum`s strategies for relegitimizing journalism in the information age. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 15(3), 325-335.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gamson, W. A., et al. (1992). Media images and the social construction of reality. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 373-393.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1-37.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lippmann, W. (1965). Public opinion. New York: Free Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS evening news, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. New York: Vintage Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. Beverly, CA: University of California Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Glasgow Media Group (1976). Bad news. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Glasser, T.L. (1984). Objectivity precludes responsibility. The Quill. Feb, 13-16.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hackett, R. (1984). Decline of a paradigm? Bias and objectivity in new media studies. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 1, 229–259.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hackett, R. A., & Zhao, Yuezhi. (1998). Sustaining democracy? Journalism and the politics of objectivity. Toronto: Garamond.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hemanus, P. (1976). Objectivity in news transmission. Journal of Communication, 26(4), 102-107.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hess, J. D. (1984). The government / press connection. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Holbert, R. L., & Zubric, S. J. (2000). A comparative analysis: Objective & public journalism techniques. Newspaper Research Journal, 21(4), 50-67.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hindman, E. B. (1998). Spectacles of the poor: Conventions of alternative news. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly; 75(1), 177-193.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McDonald, D. (1975). Is objective possible? In J. C. Merrill & B. Ralph (Eds.), Ethics and the press. New York: Hastings House.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Iggers, J. (1998). Good news, bad news. Journalism ethics and the public interest. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Janowitz, M. (1975). Professional models in journalism: The gatekeeper and the advocate. Journalism Quarterly, 52, 618-626, 662.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kieran, M. (1998). Media ethics: A philosophical approach. London: Routledge.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kocher, R. (1986). Bloodhounds or missionaries: Role definitions of German and British journalists. European Journal of Communication, 1(1), 43-64.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lambeth, E. B. (1992). Committed journalism: An ethic for the profession. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lang, G.. E., & Lang, K. (1981). Watergate: An exploration of the agenda-building process. In G.. C. Wilhoit & H. de Bock (Eds.), Mass Communication Review Yearbook, 2: 447-468.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Reeb, R. H. Jr. (1999). Taking journalism seriously: "Objectivity" as a partisan cause. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McLean, E. (1981). Between the lines. Montreal: Black Rose Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York : McGraw-Hill.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McQuail, D. (1983). Mass Communication Theory. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McQuail, D. (1992). Media performance: Mass communication and the public interest. London: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Merrill, J. C. (1997). Journalism ethics: Philosophical foundations for news media. New York: St. Martin’s Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Merrill, J. C. (1984). Journalistic objectivity is not possible. In E. E. Dennis & J. C. Merrill (Eds.), Basic issues in mass communication: A debate (pp. 104–110). New York: Macmillan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Meyer, P. (2005.1.12). Closely watched media humbled. USA Today，取自http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-01-12-meyer_x.htmzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 吳燕玲、陶令瑜（2000）。〈黎智英：我們不是賣雜誌，我們是賣共鳴、賣感覺！〉 ，zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mindich, D. T. Z.(1998). Just the facts: How "objectivity" came to define American journalism. New York: New York University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mirando, J. A. (2001). Embracing objectivity early on: Journalism textbooks of the 1800s. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 16(1), 23-32.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Meyer, P. (2005). Closely watched media humbled. USA Today. Retrieved Januaryzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 12, 2005, fromzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-01-12-meyer_x.htmzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Neimeyer, G. J. (1993). Constructivist assessment: A casebook. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ognianova, E., & Endersby, J. W. (1996). Objectivity revisited: A spatial model of political ideology and mass communication. Journalism and Mass Communication Monographs, vol. 159.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55-75.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Patterson, T. E., & Donsbach, W. (1996). News decisions: Journalists as partisan actors. Political Communication, vol. 13 (4), 455-468.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Philips, E. B. (1977). Approaches to objectivity. In P. M. Hirsch (Eds.), Strategies for communication research (pp. 63-78). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 《新新聞周報》，742：30–37。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pottker, H. (2004). Objectivity as (self-)censorship: Against the dogmatisation of professional ethics in journalism. The Public, 11(2), 83-94.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Roscho, B. (1975). Newsmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ryan, M. (2001). Journalistic ethics, objectivity, existential journalism, standpoint epistemology, and public journalism. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 16(1), 3-22.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Schiller, D. (1981). Objectivity and the news. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the news: A social history of American newspapers. New York: Basic Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Schudson, M. (1990). Origins of the ideal of objectivity in the professions : Studies in the history of American journalism and American law, 1830-1940. New York: Garland.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Shaw, D. (1967). News bias and the telegraph: A study of historical change. Journalism Quarterly, 44, 3-12.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1991). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content. New York: Longman.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Smith, A. (1980). Is objectivity obsolete? Journalists lost their innocence in the seventies—and gained new voices for the eighties. Columbia Journalism Review, May–June, 61–65.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Staab, J. F. (1990). The role of news factors in news selection: A theoretical reconsideration. European Journal of Communication, 5, 423-443.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 林元輝（2004）。〈本土學術史的「新聞」概念流變〉，收錄於翁秀琪主編，《台灣傳播學的想像》。台北：五南。頁055-084。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Stensaas, H. S. (1986). Development of the objectivity ethic in U.S. daily newspaper. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 2 (1), 50-60.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Stoker, K. (1995). Existential objectivity: Freeing journalists to be ethical. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 10 (1), 5-22.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Streckfuss, R. (1990). Objectivity in journalism: A search and a reassessment. Journalism Quarterly, 67 (4), 973-983.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tuchman, G. (1999). Objectivity as strategic ritual: An examination of newsmen’s notion of objectivity. In H. Tumber (Eds.), News: A reader (pp. 297-307). New York: Oxford University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: Free Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Udick, R. (1993). The Hutchins paradox: Objectivity versus diversity. Mass Communication Review, 20, 148-157.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Westerstahl, J. (1983). Objective news reporting. Communication Research, 10, 403-424.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2000). Mass media research: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 林照真（1987）。《從新聞報導實例探討新聞客觀性之體現》。國立政治大學新聞zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 林昱廷（2004）。《「非常報導」光碟議題建構與新聞框架分析—以中時、自由、zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 聯合報為例》。國立臺灣師範大學大眾傳播研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 施盈廷（2003）。〈資訊時代的新聞概念──小寫新聞的誕生〉，《資訊社會研究》，zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 4：181-210。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 紀慧君（2003）。《建構新聞事實：定位與權力》。國立政治大學新聞研究所博士zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 姚人多（2005）。〈藍綠政治力下的媒體亂象何時了〉，台灣記協2004年新聞年報。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 翁秀琪、鍾蔚文、簡妙如、邱承君（1999）。〈似假還真的新聞文本世界：新聞如zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 何呈現超經驗事件〉，《新聞學研究》，第58期。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 陳順孝（2002）。〈客觀報導與春秋筆法——探索華人新聞報導的「使用理論」〉，zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 「中華傳播學會2002年會」論文。台北：深坑。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 陳順孝（2003）。《新聞控制與反控制：「記實避禍」的報導策略》。台北：五南。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 馮建三（2004）。〈渴望「正常資本主義國家」的八天：分析五家日報2004年總zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 統大選後的新聞〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》，54：277-290。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 黃新生（1994）。〈新聞客觀性：一個渺茫，但值得追求的目標〉，臧國仁（編）。《新聞學與術的對話》，頁43-44。台北：國立政治大學新聞研究所。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 黃厚銘（2001）。《虛擬社區中的身分認同與信任》。國立台灣大學社會學博士論zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 黃惠鈴（1997）。《報紙如何報導總統選舉新聞：聯合報、自由時報與中央日報的比較分析》。國立政治大學新聞所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 黃美惠（2001）。《媒介建構之女性參政框架—─以副總統呂秀蓮的新聞報導為例》。淡江大學大眾傳播學系傳播碩士班碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 彭家發（1994）。《新聞客觀性原理》。台北：三民。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 彭湘怡（2004）。〈AC尼爾森調查：蘋果「昨日」與「過去7天」閱讀率皆排第2〉。《銘報即時新聞》。上網日期：2004年11月1日，取自http://mol.mcu.edu.tw/show.php?nid=39283zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 管中祥（2004）。〈政黨立場明顯 看不到公民立場〉，媒體改造論壇。上網日期：2004年3月15日，取自http://twmedia.org/archives/000694.htmlzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 張甄薇（1992）。《衝突性社會議題之新聞框架研究-以台灣政治反對運動為例（1960-1991）》。輔大大眾傳播研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 財團法人新聞公害防治基金會（2004年3月）。〈「陳由豪政治獻金事件」新聞處理分析〉，新聞公害防治基金會報紙觀察報告(四)。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 趙眉（1999）。〈新聞與文學：重讀海明威〉，《傳媒透視》，取自http://www.rthk.org.hk/mediadigest/md9910/08.htmlzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 《銘傳即時新聞》（2005年3月2日）。〈台灣日報推動台灣正名辦捐報〉，上網日期：2005年3月2日，取自http://mol.mcu.edu.tw/show.php?nid=46314zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 鄭瑞城（1991）。〈從消息來源途徑詮釋媒介近用權：台灣的驗證〉。《新聞學研究》，zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 第45期。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 臧國仁、鍾蔚文 ( 1997 )。〈框架概念與公共關係策略----有關運用媒介框架的探析〉，《廣告學研究》，9：99-130。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 韓享良（2002）。《國內報紙內容對失業議題之報導框架研究—─以聯合報、中國時報、自由時報為例》。世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 羅文輝（1985）。〈客觀與新聞報導〉，《報學》第7卷，第5期，頁110-116。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 羅文輝（1991）。《精確新聞報導》。台北：正中。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 羅文輝、鍾蔚文（1992）。〈報紙與電視如何報導民國八十年的第二屆國代選舉〉，《亞洲協會專題研究報告》。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 羅文輝、法治斌（1993）。〈客觀報導與誹謗〉，《中文傳播研究論述》，頁285-310。台北：政大傳播學院研究中心。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 羅文輝、黃葳葳（2000）。《報紙與電視總統選舉新聞的比較研究》。聯合報系文化基金會專題研究報告。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 羅文輝、侯志欽（2004）。〈2004年電視總統選舉新聞的政黨偏差〉，「數位化時代與新聞報導研討會」論文。台北：台灣大學新聞研究所。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 羅世宏（1994）。《後蔣經國時代的國家、大眾媒介與反對運動：國家認同議題的媒介框架分析》。國立政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 鍾蔚文（1992）。《從媒介真實到主觀真實：看新聞，怎麼看？看到什麼？》。台北：正中。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 英文部份zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Allan, S. (1997). News and the public sphere: Towards a history of objectivity and impartiality. In M. Bromley & T. O’Malley(Eds.), A journalism reader (pp. 296-329). New York: Routledge.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Altheide, D. L. (1976). Creating reality: How TV news distorts events. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Altschull, J. H. (1984). Agents of power: The role of the news media in human affairs. New York: Longman.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Bantimaroundis, P., & Ban, H. (2001). Covering the crisis in Somalia: Framing choices by the New York Times and the Manchester Guardian. In S. D. Reese, et al. (Eds.), Framing public life. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Bogart, L. (1989). Press and public. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Becker, L. C. (1991). Impartiality and ethical theory. Ethics, 101, 698-700.zh_TW