查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 國民意志展現亦或總統大選操作--臺灣報紙對2004年首度行使公投的建構與再現
- 傅柯論述分析在臺灣的使用
- 課程改革中的權力展佈與知識新生
- 進入傅柯系譜學分析的兩種策略[評Gavin Kendall, Gary M. Wickham, Using Foucault's Methods ; Jean Carabine, “Unmarried motherhood 1830-1990: A genealogical analysis”]
- The Construction of a Buddhist-Confucian Discourse Community: A Discourse Analysis of the Family Ethics Propagated by Hwadzan Pure Land Association
- 精緻化的Willig傅柯式論述分析方法:以Gee微觀論述分析與劇場圖像作為雙翼
- 德國公民投票制度的發展
- 澳洲公民投票的歷史
- 斯地降臨!﹖:東海神話暨其早期建築設計論述(1950年代末至1960年代中)
- 西歐公民投票的執行及其功能之分析
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 國民意志展現亦或總統大選操作--臺灣報紙對2004年首度行使公投的建構與再現=A Display of National Volition and/or a Manipulation of Presidential Election--A Construction and Representation of Taiwan's Newspaper's Coverage of 2004 Plebiscite |
---|---|
作者姓名(中文) | 陳郁宜; | 書刊名 | 銘傳學刊 |
卷期 | 15 民95.05 |
頁次 | 頁59-79 |
分類號 | 572.63、572.63 |
關鍵詞 | 公民投票; 傅柯; 論述分析; Plebiscite; Foucault; Discourse analyses; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 臺灣在2004年3月20日總統大選同日舉辦了首次的全國性公民投票。此次公投引發朝野莫大的爭議、國際社會的關注,並引來大陸當局的高分貝示警。在宣布公投至舉辦公投的三個多月期間,不僅朝野政黨不斷透過各種論述競逐相關議題的主導權,臺灣的主要報紙也介入了這場議題與框架的競逐過程。本研究即試圖透過傅柯(Michel Foucault)論述分析途徑,重新梳理各媒體的新聞文本,還原媒體對公投議題的態度及立場。 研究中發現各報的論述主軸是各有所本,整體而言,可說是臺灣意志展現及總統大選操作的對立。基本上,自由時報是以臺灣主體性為公投包裝,強調公投為人民權利、普世價值,並在深化臺灣民主、確保臺灣主權;聯合報則以動機、權謀角度看待,認為公投意圖操作大選贏得選戰;中國時報則以程序民主做為論述主軸,強調守憲守法、法治民主的重要。所以各報所呈現的論述內容,自由時報是以認同的立場,闡明及支持320公投的必要性;聯合報是以反對的立場去質疑320公投的舉辦目的;中國時報企圖在法理間提出諍言。各報的論述策略即明顯的顯現對公投議題立場及論述內容的分歧。 |
英文摘要 | On March 20th 2004, on the same day as the Presidential Election took part in Taiwan, a nationwide Plebiscite was also held for the first time ever. The Plebiscite aroused a firm debate within the political arena and the public alike, drew the international community's attention and also drew some high-decibel warnings from the PRC authorities, During the three months period since the Plebiscite was publicly announced and until it took place, not only the political parties took part in this constant quarrel by raising different discourses and trying to attain the lead, but also the major Taiwanese newspapers engaged in the discourse and in this frame competition. This study tried to represent the Media's news coverage using Michel Foucault's Discourse analysis method and to reconstruct the Media's attitude and the positions it held towards the Plebiscite. The study found that the newspaper's different discourses rely mostly on their approaches, which generally oppose the display of Taiwan's volition and the manipulations in the presidential election. Generally Speaking, Liberty Times sees the plebiscite's main purpose as a display of Taiwan's sovereignty. The newspapers emphasize that the Plebiscite involves human rights and universal values, and moreover it deepens Taiwan's Democracy and maintains its sovereignty; on the other hand, The United Daily tries to define the motives and the political tactics behind the Plebiscite. It portrays the plebiscite as a tool for winning the elections; China Times considers procedural democracy as the main pillar in his discourse. It outlines the importance of obeying the consitution and adhering the rule of the law and the practice of democracy. Consequently, each newspaper engaged in a specific discourse: Liberty Times took on a position of identification, and supported the importance of March 20th Plebiscite; the United Daily took on an opposing position, putting the purposes for holding the Plebiscite in doubt; China Times attempted to debate on the issue through a legal principals. Hence, the different attitudes towards the Plebiscite are manifested clearly through the coverage and discourses held by each Newspaper. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。