1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Communication
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 卑微與崇高：馬來西亞華文報記者的自我角色認知
Self-perception of Chinese language newspapers` reporters in Malaysia
作者 廖珮雯
Liaw, Pey Wen
貢獻者 朱立
Zhu, Leonardo
廖珮雯
Liaw, Pey Wen
關鍵詞 馬來西亞華人
自我
他者
自我認知
Malaysian Chinese
self
others
self-identity
日期 2007
上傳時間 17-Sep-2009 15:50:41 (UTC+8)
摘要 　　馬來人、華人和印度人構成馬來西亞的三大種族，馬來人占馬來西亞總人口半數以上，華人和印度人屬少數族群。馬來族群享有憲法上的特權，在政治、經濟、文化、語文、教育上，華人則一直遭受不平等待遇，受到歧視。馬來西亞的報界也反映了這個多種族的不平等特質，馬來文報和英文報具有政治和語言優勢，在社會上具有影響力，而華文報的影響力只侷限在華人圈子。本研究所欲探討的便是：在這種大環境下，馬來西亞華文報記者角色的自我認知。

　　本論文以Cooley的「鏡中自我」和Mead的「概化他者」為理論基礎，再引用Strauss, Stone和Goffman強調的情境式identity，配合Hirsch提出的職業、組織、制度三個研究分析層次，來深入分析華文報記者在不同層次的工作場域，以及面對不同的概化他者，所型塑出的自我認知類型。

　　筆者以滾雪球的方式，訪問了18位在吉隆坡的華文報記者，每位做了一至二小時不等的深度訪談，本研究發現，在職業層面，面對華文報同行，記者有糊口飯吃和受同行認同與賞識的自我認知，而這種自我認知則受記者在報館地位和新聞組別的影響。當面對外文報同行時，有的記者的自我認知是高人一等和承認自己弱點，而有的記者則頗負面，有不屑與卑微的自我認知。

　　在組織層面，本研究發現，記者面對報館這個概化他者時，出現三種情況：在主流與非主流報章的差異方面，非主流記者的自我認知受到報館地位的影響小，反而因為在報館享有較少的規範與約束而產生高自我認知；相反地，主流報章記者的自我認知，則因為報館地位和規範與約束的影響，產生正負兩種自我認知。此外，記者也會因報章風格而影響自我認知。在大報方面，記者的自我認知不會受報章銷售量滑落影響，反而因為報館的名聲、影響力、地位以及悠久的歷史而產生高自我認知。

　　在制度層面，本研究將記者與報業環境作連結，發現記者都將造成自我認知卑微的原因歸咎於外在的結構因素，包括華文報業結構和政治環境，卻沒有發現本身語言能力、專業素質和態度的不足，也是出現卑微的自我認知的因素之一。當記者面對政治力量和法令時，產生三種類型的自我認知，包括敢於挑戰、自我設限和反感。

　　本研究也發現，受到了馬來西亞各種族不平等的政、經、社、教情境的影響，華文報記者有既自大又自卑的自我認知。本研究係質性的「厚描」，將來如有人做量化的社會調查，當能使我們對馬來西亞的華文報與華文記者有更全、更深的認識。
Three main races, Malays, Chinese and Indians, compose of Malaysia’s population with the majority Malays enjoying special constitutional privileges while the Chinese suffering political, economic, cultural, linguistic and educational inequality. Such state is also reflected in the Malaysia press. While the Malay and English language newspapers wave greater social and political influences, those of the Chinese language press are limited within the ethnic Chinese. This thesis is aimed at finding out the self-identity of Chinese language newspaper reporters in this unequal multi-racial Malaysian context.

Conceptually, this research is constructed on Cooley’s theory of “looking glass self” and Mead’s “generalized others”. The “situational identity” proposed by Strauss, Stone and Goffman also forms a basis on which the thesis examines the identity of Chinese press reporters on institutional, organizational and individual levels as theorized by Hirsch.

By a snowballing method, this author interviewed 18 Chinese language newspaper reporters in Kuala Lumpur. Each in-depth interview took from one to two hours. On the occupational level, the generalized others are found to be other Chinese language newspaper reporters, whose self-identity ranges from making a living to wanting to be recognized or appreciated by colleagues. The latter is influenced by the status of newspapers and different kinds of newsgroups. When compared with Malay or English language newspaper reporters, the Chinese language press reporters perceive themselves possessing a higher social status while at the same time admitting self’s weakness. On the other hand, there are Chinese language newspaper reporters who show an identity of disdain and humbleness.

On the organizational level, three situations characterize the interviewed reporters. First, while non-mainstream newspaper reporters are less influenced by the status of newspaper, they have higher self-perception due to less restriction and higher autonomy in their work. Meanwhile, these reporters express both positive and negative self-perceptions influenced by the status and restriction of their newspaper. Second, reporters show different self-perception when the style of newspaper acts as one of the prominent factors. Thirdly, reporters at quality newspapers are less influenced by sales of the newspaper. Their higher perception self-identity is found to derive from the reputation, influence, status and history of the newspaper.

On institutional level, this study has found that the interviewed reporters attribute their humble self-identity to such structural factors as Chinese language newspaper’s internal structure problems and external political environment while circumventing their own insufficiency in language command and professionalism. When faced with Malaysia’s unequal political and legal realities, there are three kinds of self-identity: daring to challenge, practicing self-censorship or showing resentment.

This study adopts a qualitative method of “thick description” in its analysis. Future research shall reveal more by adopting a survey of statistically sampled reporters.
參考文獻 壹、中文部分
于維寧（2004）。《馬來西亞《東方日報》之研究：在報業壟斷與政治干預夾擊下的生存之道》。國立暨南國際大學東南亞研究所碩士論文。
王志弘、許妍飛譯（2006）。《社會認同》，台北：巨流。（原書Jenkins, R. [1996]. Social identity. London: Routledge.）
王國璋（1997）。《馬來西亞的族群政黨政治（1955~1995）》。台北：唐山。
王賡武（1970）。〈馬來亞華人的政治〉，姚楠（編），《東南亞與華人－王賡武教授論文選集》，頁155-192。北京：友誼。
包凡一、王湲譯（1992）。《人類本性與社會秩序》，台北：桂冠。（原書Cooley, C. H. [1902]. Human nature and the social order. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons）
古鴻廷（2003）。《教育與認同：馬來西亞華文中學教育之研究（1945-2000）》。廈門：廈門大學。
任元傑（1985）。《協和民主的理論與實際－複式社會政治秩序與變遷之研究》。國立台灣大學政治研究所碩士論文。
朱自存（1994）。《縱觀華報五十年：馬來西亞華文報發展實況》。吉隆坡：東方企業。
宋哲美（1963）。《馬來西亞華人史》。香港：中華文化。
李萬千（2001）。〈張曉卿：林良實的策略夥伴〉，林德順（主編），《報殤－南洋報業淪陷評論集》，頁126-130。馬來西亞：飛腳。
林德順（主編）（2001）。《報殤－南洋報業淪陷評論集》。馬來西亞：飛腳。
星洲日報（2008）。《星洲日報－歷史寫在大馬的土地上》。馬來西亞：星洲日報。
胡幼慧、姚美華（1996）。〈一些質性方法上的思考〉，胡幼慧（主編），《質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例》，頁141-158。台北：巨流。
胡榮、王小章譯（1995）。《心靈、自我與社會》，台北：桂冠。（原書Mead, G. H. [1934]. Mind, self and society—from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.）
孫中興（1993），〈人類本性與社會秩序導讀〉，包凡一、王湲（譯），《人類本性與社會秩序》，頁ix-xxii，台北：桂冠。
徐宗國譯（1997）。《質性研究概論》，台北：巨流。（原書Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. [1990]. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. United States: Sage.）
崔貴強（2002）。《東南亞華文日報現狀之研究》。新加坡：華裔館。
莊迪澎（2004a）。《強勢首相 vs 弱勢媒體：給馬哈迪的媒體操控算帳》。馬來西亞：破媒體。
莊迪澎（2004b）。《看破媒體》。馬來西亞：破媒體。
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。
陳劍虹（1984）。〈戰後大馬華人的政治發展〉，林水豪、駱靜山（編），《馬來西亞華人史》，頁91-138。吉隆坡：馬來西亞留台校友會聯合總會。
陳鴻瑜（2006）。《東南亞各國政府與政治》。台北：翰蘆。
曾維龍（主編）（2007）。《黃絲帶飄揚－2006馬來西亞反對媒體壟斷運動實錄》。馬來西亞：維護媒體獨立撰稿人聯盟。
黃招勤（2004）。《西馬來西亞華文報之發展與困境－多族群環境中報紙角色和功能的轉變》。世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。
楊建成（1982）。《馬來西亞華人的困境-西馬來西亞華巫政治關係之探討(1957-1978)》。台北：文哲史出版社。
葉觀仕（1996）。《馬.新新聞史》。馬來西亞：韓江新聞傳播學院新聞傳播學系。
葉觀仕（1999）。《馬新報人錄》。馬來西亞：名人。
蕭瑞麟（2006）。《不用數字的研究：鍛鍊深度思考力的質性研究》。台北：台灣培生教育。
羅文輝等（2004）。《變遷中的大陸、香港、台灣新聞人員》。台北：巨流。
貳、英文部分
Arbee, A. R. (1990). Malaysia. In C. J. Hamelink & A. Mehra (Eds.), Communication development and human rights in Asia (pp51-67). Singapore: Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Center.
Barrett, G. H. (1984). Job satisfaction among newspaperwomen. Journalism Quarterly, 61(3), 593-599.
Benhabib, S. (1986). The generalized and the concrete other: The Kohlberg-Gilligan controversy and feminist theory. Praxis International, 5(4), 402-424.
Brookover, W. B., Thomas, A. & Paterson, A. (1964). Self-concept of ability and school achievement. Sociology of education, 37(3), 271-278.
Brubaker, R. & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond identity. Theory and Society, 29(1), 1-47.
Chan, J. M., Pan, Z. & Lee, F. L. F. (2004). Professional aspirations and job satisfaction: Chinese journalists at a time of change in the media. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(2), 254-264.
Cheng, A. & Starks, B. (2002). Racial differences in the effects of significant others on students’ educational expectations. Sociology of Education, 75(4), 306-327.
Cooley, C. H. (1983). Human nature and the social order (5th ed.). New York: Schocken Books.
Couch, C. J. & Murray, J. S. (1964). Significant others and evaluation. Sociometry, 27, 502-509.
Denzin, N. K. (1967). The significant others of a college population. The Sociological Quarterly, 7(3), 298-310.
Dodds, A. E., Lawrence, J. A. & Valsiner, J. (1997). The personal and the social: Mead’s theory of the generalized other. Theory and Psychology, 7(4), 483-503.
Flick, U. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research. London: Sage.
Freedman, A. L. (2000). Political participation and ethnic minorities. New York: Routledge.
Gilley, B. (2000). Affirmative reaction. Far Eastern Economic Review, 163(32), 26-27.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Gomez, E. T. (1994). Political business: Corporate involvement of Malaysian political parties. Townsville: James Cook University of Northern Queensland.
Heng, P. K. (1992). The Chinese business elites of Malaysia. In Ruth McVey (Ed.), Southeast asian capitalist (pp.127-44). Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program.
Heng, P. K. and Sieh, L. M. L. (2000). The Chinese business community in Peninsular Malaysia, 1957-1999. In K. H. Lee, & C. B. Tan (Eds.), The Chinese in Malaysia (pp.123-168). New York: Oxford.
Heuvel, J. V. & Dennis, E. E. (1993). Malaysia. The unfolding lotus: East Asia’s changing media (pp.146-160). New York: Freedom Forum Media Studies Center.
Hirsch, P. M. (1977). Occupational, organizational, and institutional models in mass media research: Toward an integrated framework. In P. M. Hirsch, P. V. Miller & F. G. Kline (Eds.), Strategies for communication research (pp.13-37). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Idid, S. A. (1989). Malaysia. In A. Mehra (Ed.), Press systems in Asean states (pp.41-56). Singapore: Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Center.
Jayasankaran, S. (2000). A nation still divided. Far Eastern Economic Review, 163(49), 26-28.
Kuhn, M. H. (1964). The reference group reconsidered. The Sociological Quarterly, 5(1), 5-21.
Lee, K. H. and Heng, P. K. (2000). The Chinese in the Malaysian political system. In K. H. Lee, & C. B. Tan (Eds.), The Chinese in Malaysia (pp.194-227). New York : Oxford.
Mahathir, M. (1989). The social responsibility of the press. In A. Mehra (Ed.), Press systems in Asean states (pp.107-116). Singapore: Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Center.
Mead, G. H. (1956). On social psychology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Merton, R. K. & Kitt, A. S. (1952). Contributions to the theory of reference group behavior. In Readings in social psychology. New York: Holt.
Merton, R. K., Fiske, L. M. & Kendall, P. L. (1990). The focused interview: A manual of problems and procedures. New York: Free Pree.
Miyamoto, S. F. & Dornbush, S. M. (1956). A test of interactionist hypotheses of self-conception. The American Journal of Sociology, 61(5), 399-403.
Montlake, S. (2008). Race politics hobbles Malaysia. Far Eastern Economic Review, 171(2), 36-39.
Parker, E. S. (1982). Malaysia. In G. T. Kurian (Ed.), World press encyclopedia (pp.613-626). London: Mansell.
Phang, H. E. (2000). The economic role of the chinese in Malaysia. In K. H. Lee & C. B. Tan (Eds.), The Chinese in Malaysia (pp.94-122). New York: Oxford.
Pollard, G. (1995). Job satisfaction among newsworkers: The influence of professionalism, perceptions of organization structure, and social attributes. Journalism Quarterly, 72(3) 682-687.
Quick, A. C. (Ed.). (2003). World press encyclopedia: A survey of press systems worldwide (Second Edition). Farmington Hills: Gale.
Regional outlook Southeast Asia 2006-2007 (2006). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Reeder, L. G., Donohue, G. A. & Biblarz, A. (1960). Conceptions of self and others. The American Journal of Sociology, 66(2), 153-159.
Safar, H. M., Sarji, A. & Gunaratne, S. A. (2000). Malaysia. In S. A. Gunaratne (Ed.), Handbook of the media in Asia (pp.317-349). New Delhi: Sage.
Samuelson, M. (1962). A standardized test to measure job satisfaction. Journalism Quarterly, 29(2), 285-291.
Schlenker, B. R. (1985). Identity and self-identification. In B. R. Schlenker. (Ed.), The self and social life. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research. London: Sage.
Shaver, H. C. (1978). Job satisfaction and dissatisfaction among journalism graduates. Journalism Quarterly, 55(1), 54-61.
Sherwood, J. J. (1965). Self identity and referent others. Sociometry, 28(1), 66-81.
Sieh, L. M. L. (1992). The transformation of Malaysian business groups. In Ruth McVey (Ed.), Southeast asian capitalist (pp.103-26). Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program.
Stone, G. P. (1962). Appearance and self. In M. R. Arnold (Ed.), Human behavior and social processes: An interactionist approach. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Strauss, A. L. (1959). Mirrors and masks: The search for identity. Glencoe: Free Press.
Weaver, D. & Wilhoit, C. G. (1996). The American journalist in the 1990s: US news people at the end of an era. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Weigert, A. J. (1983). Identity: Its emergence within sociological psychology. Symbolic Interaction, 6(2), 183-206.
Woelfel, J., Haller, A. O. (1971). Significant others, the self-reflexive act and the attitude formation process. American Sociological Review, 36(1), 74-87.
叁、網絡資料
〈興都權益大集會特別報導〉，《當今大馬》。（2007年11月30日）。取自http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/75529
丁國亮（2008年3月14日）。〈抗議檳州廢新經濟政策　約五百巫統馬來人示威〉，《獨立新聞在線》。上網日期：2008年3月14日，取自http://merdekareview.com/news.php?n=6252
金格（2008年3月4日）。〈本屆大選主軸：否決「巫統特權主義」〉，《當今大馬》。上網日期：2008年3月10日，取自http://malaysiakini.com/columns/79108
楊凱斌（2007年10月31日）。〈林巴再也木屋興都廟拆遷衝突　四黨團律師被控警局鬧事遭扣〉，《當今大馬》。上網日期：2008年3月10日，取自http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/74196
蕭方（2007年1月31日）。〈巫統亮出「馬來劍」　馬來西亞再陷種族主義泥沼〉，《鳳凰周刊》。上網日期：2008年3月10日，取自http://news.ifeng.com/phoenixtv/73007589264195584/20070131/907816.shtml
Department Statistics of Malaysia. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29, 2008, from http://www.statistics.gov.my/
Freedom House. (n.d.). Map of freedom 2008. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&year=2008&country=7440
Freedom House. (n.d.). Map of press freedom 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=251&year=2007
Hannah Beech (2008, February 28). Lowered Expectations as Malaysia Votes. Time Magazine. Retrieved March 14, 2008, from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1717906,00.html
Reporters without borders. (n.d.). Worldwide press freedom index 2006. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=19388
Reporters without borders. (n.d.). Worldwide press freedom index 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=24025
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
新聞研究所
95451031
96
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095451031
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 朱立zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Zhu, Leonardoen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 廖珮雯zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Liaw, Pey Wenen_US
dc.creator (作者) 廖珮雯zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Liaw, Pey Wenen_US
dc.date (日期) 2007en_US
dc.date.accessioned 17-Sep-2009 15:50:41 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 17-Sep-2009 15:50:41 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 17-Sep-2009 15:50:41 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0095451031en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33231-
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) 95451031zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 96zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 　　馬來人、華人和印度人構成馬來西亞的三大種族，馬來人占馬來西亞總人口半數以上，華人和印度人屬少數族群。馬來族群享有憲法上的特權，在政治、經濟、文化、語文、教育上，華人則一直遭受不平等待遇，受到歧視。馬來西亞的報界也反映了這個多種族的不平等特質，馬來文報和英文報具有政治和語言優勢，在社會上具有影響力，而華文報的影響力只侷限在華人圈子。本研究所欲探討的便是：在這種大環境下，馬來西亞華文報記者角色的自我認知。

　　本論文以Cooley的「鏡中自我」和Mead的「概化他者」為理論基礎，再引用Strauss, Stone和Goffman強調的情境式identity，配合Hirsch提出的職業、組織、制度三個研究分析層次，來深入分析華文報記者在不同層次的工作場域，以及面對不同的概化他者，所型塑出的自我認知類型。

　　筆者以滾雪球的方式，訪問了18位在吉隆坡的華文報記者，每位做了一至二小時不等的深度訪談，本研究發現，在職業層面，面對華文報同行，記者有糊口飯吃和受同行認同與賞識的自我認知，而這種自我認知則受記者在報館地位和新聞組別的影響。當面對外文報同行時，有的記者的自我認知是高人一等和承認自己弱點，而有的記者則頗負面，有不屑與卑微的自我認知。

　　在組織層面，本研究發現，記者面對報館這個概化他者時，出現三種情況：在主流與非主流報章的差異方面，非主流記者的自我認知受到報館地位的影響小，反而因為在報館享有較少的規範與約束而產生高自我認知；相反地，主流報章記者的自我認知，則因為報館地位和規範與約束的影響，產生正負兩種自我認知。此外，記者也會因報章風格而影響自我認知。在大報方面，記者的自我認知不會受報章銷售量滑落影響，反而因為報館的名聲、影響力、地位以及悠久的歷史而產生高自我認知。

　　在制度層面，本研究將記者與報業環境作連結，發現記者都將造成自我認知卑微的原因歸咎於外在的結構因素，包括華文報業結構和政治環境，卻沒有發現本身語言能力、專業素質和態度的不足，也是出現卑微的自我認知的因素之一。當記者面對政治力量和法令時，產生三種類型的自我認知，包括敢於挑戰、自我設限和反感。

　　本研究也發現，受到了馬來西亞各種族不平等的政、經、社、教情境的影響，華文報記者有既自大又自卑的自我認知。本研究係質性的「厚描」，將來如有人做量化的社會調查，當能使我們對馬來西亞的華文報與華文記者有更全、更深的認識。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Three main races, Malays, Chinese and Indians, compose of Malaysia’s population with the majority Malays enjoying special constitutional privileges while the Chinese suffering political, economic, cultural, linguistic and educational inequality. Such state is also reflected in the Malaysia press. While the Malay and English language newspapers wave greater social and political influences, those of the Chinese language press are limited within the ethnic Chinese. This thesis is aimed at finding out the self-identity of Chinese language newspaper reporters in this unequal multi-racial Malaysian context.

Conceptually, this research is constructed on Cooley’s theory of “looking glass self” and Mead’s “generalized others”. The “situational identity” proposed by Strauss, Stone and Goffman also forms a basis on which the thesis examines the identity of Chinese press reporters on institutional, organizational and individual levels as theorized by Hirsch.

By a snowballing method, this author interviewed 18 Chinese language newspaper reporters in Kuala Lumpur. Each in-depth interview took from one to two hours. On the occupational level, the generalized others are found to be other Chinese language newspaper reporters, whose self-identity ranges from making a living to wanting to be recognized or appreciated by colleagues. The latter is influenced by the status of newspapers and different kinds of newsgroups. When compared with Malay or English language newspaper reporters, the Chinese language press reporters perceive themselves possessing a higher social status while at the same time admitting self’s weakness. On the other hand, there are Chinese language newspaper reporters who show an identity of disdain and humbleness.

On the organizational level, three situations characterize the interviewed reporters. First, while non-mainstream newspaper reporters are less influenced by the status of newspaper, they have higher self-perception due to less restriction and higher autonomy in their work. Meanwhile, these reporters express both positive and negative self-perceptions influenced by the status and restriction of their newspaper. Second, reporters show different self-perception when the style of newspaper acts as one of the prominent factors. Thirdly, reporters at quality newspapers are less influenced by sales of the newspaper. Their higher perception self-identity is found to derive from the reputation, influence, status and history of the newspaper.

On institutional level, this study has found that the interviewed reporters attribute their humble self-identity to such structural factors as Chinese language newspaper’s internal structure problems and external political environment while circumventing their own insufficiency in language command and professionalism. When faced with Malaysia’s unequal political and legal realities, there are three kinds of self-identity: daring to challenge, practicing self-censorship or showing resentment.

This study adopts a qualitative method of “thick description” in its analysis. Future research shall reveal more by adopting a survey of statistically sampled reporters.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章　研究動機與背景 ..........................................................................................1
　　　　第一節　研究動機 ..............................................................................................1
　　　　第二節　研究背景 ..............................................................................................2
　　　　第三節　研究架構和研究問題 ..........................................................................5

第二章　馬來西亞多元族群環境的政治及經濟概況 .......................................6
　　　　第一節　1957年獨立前的種族情況 .................................................................6
　　　　第二節　獨立前後（1946-1969）......................................................................7
　　　　第三節　1969年的後續發展（1969-1981）.....................................................9
　　　　第四節　馬哈迪時代（1981-2003）................................................................10
　　　　第五節　現任阿都拉時期（2003-2008）........................................................11

第三章　報業環境 ........................................................................................................14
　　　　第一節　三種主要語文報的沿革 ......................................................................14
　　　　　　　　壹、華文報的源起與概況 ..................................................................14　
　　　　　　　　貳、各家華文報概況 ..........................................................................16
　　　　　　　　叁、馬來文報概況 ..............................................................................19
　　　　　　　　肆、英文報概況 ..................................................................................19
　　　　第二節　報業集團和執政黨的關係 ..................................................................21
　　　　　　　　壹、華文報業大亨張曉卿和世華媒體集團 ......................................21　　　　　　　　　　　 　　　　　　　　　
　　　　　　　　貳、馬華和南洋報業集團 ..................................................................21
　　　　　　　　叁、巫統和馬來前鋒報集團、新海峽時報集團 ..............................22
　　　　　　　　肆、小結 ..............................................................................................23
　　　　第三節　影響報業的法令 ..................................................................................24
　　　　　　　　壹、印刷與出版法令 ..........................................................................24
　　　　　　　　貳、官方機密法令 ..............................................................................25
　　　　　　　　叁、煽動法令 ......................................................................................25
　　　　　　　　肆、馬新社法令 ..................................................................................25
　　　　第四節　馬來西亞報業環境小結 ......................................................................26

第四章　文獻探討 .........................................................................................................28
　　　　第一節　自我認同與社會互動 ...........................................................................28
　　　　　　　　壹、有關「自我」的理論 ...................................................................28　　　
　　　　　　　　貳、社會情境下的認同（identity）....................................................32
　　　　　　　　叁、社會情境下的自我認同（self-identity）.....................................35
　　　　第二節　相關記者研究 ........................................................................................37
　　　　　　　　壹、Hirsch的三個分析層次模型 .........................................................37
　　　　　　　　貳、職業性分析層次 ............................................................................38






第五章　研究方法 .........................................................................................................42
　　　　第一節　質性研究 ...............................................................................................42
　　　　第二節　焦點訪談 ...............................................................................................44
　　　　第三節　抽樣和訪談過程 ...................................................................................44
　　　　第四節　受訪者個人資料 ...................................................................................45

第六章　研究分析 ..........................................................................................................47
　　　　第一節　馬來西亞華文報業概況 ........................................................................47
　　　　第二節　個人自我認知與概化他者的建構 ........................................................48
　　　　第三節　記者與同行 ............................................................................................49
　　　　　　　　壹、個人（自我）vs 華文報同行（他者）.........................................50
　　　　　　　　貳、華文報記者（自我）vs 外文報記者（他者）............................59
　　　　第四節　記者與報館 ............................................................................................68
　　　　　　　　壹、個人（自我） vs 報館（他者）....................................................68
　　　　第五節　記者與報業環境 .....................................................................................82
　　　　　　　　壹、華文報（自我）vs 外文報（他者）.............................................82
　　　　　　　　貳、報館（自我）vs 政府、法令（他者）.........................................94

第七章　研究結論與建議 ...........................................................................................106
　　　　第一節　研究結論 ...............................................................................................106
　　　　　　　　壹、記者與同行 ...................................................................................106
　　　　　　　　貳、記者與報館 ...................................................................................110
　　　　　　　　叁、記者與報業環境 ...........................................................................114
　　　　　　　　肆、多元種族環境下的華文報記者自我認知....................................117
　　　　第二節　研究限制與建議 ...................................................................................118
　　　　　　　　壹、研究限制 .......................................................................................118
　　　　　　　　貳、未來研究方向 ...............................................................................119

參考文獻 ............................................................................................................................120　　　　　　　　

附錄：訪談問題 ………………………………………………………………………..126

圖表目錄

表目錄

表2.1　2007年馬來西亞族群人口統計 .............................................................................6
表3.1　馬來西亞五大全國性華文報概況 ........................................................................16
表3.2　馬來西亞歷年各語文日報的每日平均銷售量 ....................................................20
表5.1　受訪者基本資料 ....................................................................................................46

圖目錄

圖7.1：合作與競爭－記者與華文報同行 .......................................................................108
圖7.2：讚賞與不屑－華文報記者與外文報記者 ...........................................................110
圖7.3：規範與自由－主流與非主流 ...............................................................................111
圖7.4：寧漏勿錯與寧錯勿漏－大報與小報 ...................................................................113
圖7.5：如日中天與江河日下－大報與大報 ...................................................................114
圖7.6：反感、自我設限與敢於挑戰－記者與政府法令 ...............................................116		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 97485 bytes-
dc.format.extent 175712 bytes-
dc.format.extent 153816 bytes-
dc.format.extent 158030 bytes-
dc.format.extent 269959 bytes-
dc.format.extent 361676 bytes-
dc.format.extent 400048 bytes-
dc.format.extent 303164 bytes-
dc.format.extent 251315 bytes-
dc.format.extent 673938 bytes-
dc.format.extent 324390 bytes-
dc.format.extent 229048 bytes-
dc.format.extent 203609 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095451031en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 馬來西亞華人zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 自我zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 他者zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 自我認知zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Malaysian Chineseen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) selfen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) othersen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) self-identityen_US
dc.title (題名) 卑微與崇高：馬來西亞華文報記者的自我角色認知zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Self-perception of Chinese language newspapers` reporters in Malaysiaen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 壹、中文部分zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 于維寧（2004）。《馬來西亞《東方日報》之研究：在報業壟斷與政治干預夾擊下的生存之道》。國立暨南國際大學東南亞研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 王志弘、許妍飛譯（2006）。《社會認同》，台北：巨流。（原書Jenkins, R. [1996]. Social identity. London: Routledge.）zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 王國璋（1997）。《馬來西亞的族群政黨政治（1955~1995）》。台北：唐山。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 王賡武（1970）。〈馬來亞華人的政治〉，姚楠（編），《東南亞與華人－王賡武教授論文選集》，頁155-192。北京：友誼。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 包凡一、王湲譯（1992）。《人類本性與社會秩序》，台北：桂冠。（原書Cooley, C. H. [1902]. Human nature and the social order. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons）zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 古鴻廷（2003）。《教育與認同：馬來西亞華文中學教育之研究（1945-2000）》。廈門：廈門大學。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 任元傑（1985）。《協和民主的理論與實際－複式社會政治秩序與變遷之研究》。國立台灣大學政治研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 朱自存（1994）。《縱觀華報五十年：馬來西亞華文報發展實況》。吉隆坡：東方企業。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 宋哲美（1963）。《馬來西亞華人史》。香港：中華文化。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李萬千（2001）。〈張曉卿：林良實的策略夥伴〉，林德順（主編），《報殤－南洋報業淪陷評論集》，頁126-130。馬來西亞：飛腳。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 林德順（主編）（2001）。《報殤－南洋報業淪陷評論集》。馬來西亞：飛腳。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 星洲日報（2008）。《星洲日報－歷史寫在大馬的土地上》。馬來西亞：星洲日報。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 胡幼慧、姚美華（1996）。〈一些質性方法上的思考〉，胡幼慧（主編），《質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例》，頁141-158。台北：巨流。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 胡榮、王小章譯（1995）。《心靈、自我與社會》，台北：桂冠。（原書Mead, G. H. [1934]. Mind, self and society—from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.）zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 孫中興（1993），〈人類本性與社會秩序導讀〉，包凡一、王湲（譯），《人類本性與社會秩序》，頁ix-xxii，台北：桂冠。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 徐宗國譯（1997）。《質性研究概論》，台北：巨流。（原書Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. [1990]. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. United States: Sage.）zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 崔貴強（2002）。《東南亞華文日報現狀之研究》。新加坡：華裔館。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 莊迪澎（2004a）。《強勢首相 vs 弱勢媒體：給馬哈迪的媒體操控算帳》。馬來西亞：破媒體。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 莊迪澎（2004b）。《看破媒體》。馬來西亞：破媒體。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) 陳劍虹（1984）。〈戰後大馬華人的政治發展〉，林水豪、駱靜山（編），《馬來西亞華人史》，頁91-138。吉隆坡：馬來西亞留台校友會聯合總會。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 陳鴻瑜（2006）。《東南亞各國政府與政治》。台北：翰蘆。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 曾維龍（主編）（2007）。《黃絲帶飄揚－2006馬來西亞反對媒體壟斷運動實錄》。馬來西亞：維護媒體獨立撰稿人聯盟。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 黃招勤（2004）。《西馬來西亞華文報之發展與困境－多族群環境中報紙角色和功能的轉變》。世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 楊建成（1982）。《馬來西亞華人的困境-西馬來西亞華巫政治關係之探討(1957-1978)》。台北：文哲史出版社。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 葉觀仕（1996）。《馬.新新聞史》。馬來西亞：韓江新聞傳播學院新聞傳播學系。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 葉觀仕（1999）。《馬新報人錄》。馬來西亞：名人。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蕭瑞麟（2006）。《不用數字的研究：鍛鍊深度思考力的質性研究》。台北：台灣培生教育。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 羅文輝等（2004）。《變遷中的大陸、香港、台灣新聞人員》。台北：巨流。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 貳、英文部分zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Arbee, A. R. (1990). Malaysia. In C. J. Hamelink & A. Mehra (Eds.), Communication development and human rights in Asia (pp51-67). Singapore: Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Center.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Barrett, G. H. (1984). Job satisfaction among newspaperwomen. Journalism Quarterly, 61(3), 593-599.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Benhabib, S. (1986). The generalized and the concrete other: The Kohlberg-Gilligan controversy and feminist theory. Praxis International, 5(4), 402-424.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Brookover, W. B., Thomas, A. & Paterson, A. (1964). Self-concept of ability and school achievement. Sociology of education, 37(3), 271-278.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Brubaker, R. & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond identity. Theory and Society, 29(1), 1-47.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chan, J. M., Pan, Z. & Lee, F. L. F. (2004). Professional aspirations and job satisfaction: Chinese journalists at a time of change in the media. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(2), 254-264.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cheng, A. & Starks, B. (2002). Racial differences in the effects of significant others on students’ educational expectations. Sociology of Education, 75(4), 306-327.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cooley, C. H. (1983). Human nature and the social order (5th ed.). New York: Schocken Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Couch, C. J. & Murray, J. S. (1964). Significant others and evaluation. Sociometry, 27, 502-509.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Denzin, N. K. (1967). The significant others of a college population. The Sociological Quarterly, 7(3), 298-310.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dodds, A. E., Lawrence, J. A. & Valsiner, J. (1997). The personal and the social: Mead’s theory of the generalized other. Theory and Psychology, 7(4), 483-503.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Flick, U. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research. London: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Freedman, A. L. (2000). Political participation and ethnic minorities. New York: Routledge.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gilley, B. (2000). Affirmative reaction. Far Eastern Economic Review, 163(32), 26-27.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gomez, E. T. (1994). Political business: Corporate involvement of Malaysian political parties. Townsville: James Cook University of Northern Queensland.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Heng, P. K. (1992). The Chinese business elites of Malaysia. In Ruth McVey (Ed.), Southeast asian capitalist (pp.127-44). Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Heng, P. K. and Sieh, L. M. L. (2000). The Chinese business community in Peninsular Malaysia, 1957-1999. In K. H. Lee, & C. B. Tan (Eds.), The Chinese in Malaysia (pp.123-168). New York: Oxford.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Heuvel, J. V. & Dennis, E. E. (1993). Malaysia. The unfolding lotus: East Asia’s changing media (pp.146-160). New York: Freedom Forum Media Studies Center.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hirsch, P. M. (1977). Occupational, organizational, and institutional models in mass media research: Toward an integrated framework. In P. M. Hirsch, P. V. Miller & F. G. Kline (Eds.), Strategies for communication research (pp.13-37). Beverly Hills: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Idid, S. A. (1989). Malaysia. In A. Mehra (Ed.), Press systems in Asean states (pp.41-56). Singapore: Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Center.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Jayasankaran, S. (2000). A nation still divided. Far Eastern Economic Review, 163(49), 26-28.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kuhn, M. H. (1964). The reference group reconsidered. The Sociological Quarterly, 5(1), 5-21.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lee, K. H. and Heng, P. K. (2000). The Chinese in the Malaysian political system. In K. H. Lee, & C. B. Tan (Eds.), The Chinese in Malaysia (pp.194-227). New York : Oxford.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mahathir, M. (1989). The social responsibility of the press. In A. Mehra (Ed.), Press systems in Asean states (pp.107-116). Singapore: Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Center.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mead, G. H. (1956). On social psychology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Merton, R. K. & Kitt, A. S. (1952). Contributions to the theory of reference group behavior. In Readings in social psychology. New York: Holt.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Merton, R. K., Fiske, L. M. & Kendall, P. L. (1990). The focused interview: A manual of problems and procedures. New York: Free Pree.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Miyamoto, S. F. & Dornbush, S. M. (1956). A test of interactionist hypotheses of self-conception. The American Journal of Sociology, 61(5), 399-403.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Montlake, S. (2008). Race politics hobbles Malaysia. Far Eastern Economic Review, 171(2), 36-39.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Parker, E. S. (1982). Malaysia. In G. T. Kurian (Ed.), World press encyclopedia (pp.613-626). London: Mansell.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Phang, H. E. (2000). The economic role of the chinese in Malaysia. In K. H. Lee & C. B. Tan (Eds.), The Chinese in Malaysia (pp.94-122). New York: Oxford.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pollard, G. (1995). Job satisfaction among newsworkers: The influence of professionalism, perceptions of organization structure, and social attributes. Journalism Quarterly, 72(3) 682-687.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Quick, A. C. (Ed.). (2003). World press encyclopedia: A survey of press systems worldwide (Second Edition). Farmington Hills: Gale.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Regional outlook Southeast Asia 2006-2007 (2006). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Reeder, L. G., Donohue, G. A. & Biblarz, A. (1960). Conceptions of self and others. The American Journal of Sociology, 66(2), 153-159.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Safar, H. M., Sarji, A. & Gunaratne, S. A. (2000). Malaysia. In S. A. Gunaratne (Ed.), Handbook of the media in Asia (pp.317-349). New Delhi: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Samuelson, M. (1962). A standardized test to measure job satisfaction. Journalism Quarterly, 29(2), 285-291.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Schlenker, B. R. (1985). Identity and self-identification. In B. R. Schlenker. (Ed.), The self and social life. New York: McGraw-Hill.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research. London: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Shaver, H. C. (1978). Job satisfaction and dissatisfaction among journalism graduates. Journalism Quarterly, 55(1), 54-61.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sherwood, J. J. (1965). Self identity and referent others. Sociometry, 28(1), 66-81.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sieh, L. M. L. (1992). The transformation of Malaysian business groups. In Ruth McVey (Ed.), Southeast asian capitalist (pp.103-26). Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Stone, G. P. (1962). Appearance and self. In M. R. Arnold (Ed.), Human behavior and social processes: An interactionist approach. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Strauss, A. L. (1959). Mirrors and masks: The search for identity. Glencoe: Free Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Weaver, D. & Wilhoit, C. G. (1996). The American journalist in the 1990s: US news people at the end of an era. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Weigert, A. J. (1983). Identity: Its emergence within sociological psychology. Symbolic Interaction, 6(2), 183-206.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Woelfel, J., Haller, A. O. (1971). Significant others, the self-reflexive act and the attitude formation process. American Sociological Review, 36(1), 74-87.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 叁、網絡資料zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 〈興都權益大集會特別報導〉，《當今大馬》。（2007年11月30日）。取自http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/75529zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 丁國亮（2008年3月14日）。〈抗議檳州廢新經濟政策　約五百巫統馬來人示威〉，《獨立新聞在線》。上網日期：2008年3月14日，取自http://merdekareview.com/news.php?n=6252zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 金格（2008年3月4日）。〈本屆大選主軸：否決「巫統特權主義」〉，《當今大馬》。上網日期：2008年3月10日，取自http://malaysiakini.com/columns/79108zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 楊凱斌（2007年10月31日）。〈林巴再也木屋興都廟拆遷衝突　四黨團律師被控警局鬧事遭扣〉，《當今大馬》。上網日期：2008年3月10日，取自http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/74196zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蕭方（2007年1月31日）。〈巫統亮出「馬來劍」　馬來西亞再陷種族主義泥沼〉，《鳳凰周刊》。上網日期：2008年3月10日，取自http://news.ifeng.com/phoenixtv/73007589264195584/20070131/907816.shtmlzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Department Statistics of Malaysia. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29, 2008, from http://www.statistics.gov.my/zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Freedom House. (n.d.). Map of freedom 2008. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&year=2008&country=7440zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Freedom House. (n.d.). Map of press freedom 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=251&year=2007zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hannah Beech (2008, February 28). Lowered Expectations as Malaysia Votes. Time Magazine. Retrieved March 14, 2008, from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1717906,00.htmlzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Reporters without borders. (n.d.). Worldwide press freedom index 2006. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=19388zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Reporters without borders. (n.d.). Worldwide press freedom index 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=24025zh_TW