頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 調查新聞學v.s.公共新聞學:兩個「公共領域」新聞理想型的對話與交融=Investigative Journalism v.s. Public Journalism: The Dialogue and Debate between the Two Ideal Types of Public Sphere |
---|---|
作者 | 林照真; | 書刊名 | 臺大新聞論壇 |
卷期 | 6 2007.02[民96.02] |
頁次 | 頁101-130 |
分類號 | 891 |
關鍵詞 | 公共新聞學; 調查新聞學; 調查報導; 公共領域; 公關; Public journalism; Investigative journalism; Investigative reporting; Public sphere; Public relation; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 媒體一向被視為是民主社會的重要指標,就在目前社會發生媒體信任危機之際,基於傳統新聞理念而來的「調查新聞學」,與挑戰傳統新聞義理的「公共新聞學」,同樣是以公共領域為新聞標的,這兩大新聞學可視為解決當前新聞困境的兩大思考方向。本文擬透過這兩大新聞理念在理論與實務之比較,進一步釐清民主社會中,新聞記者與大眾的角色與關係。文中試圖釐清「調查新聞學」與「公共新聞學」截然不同的新聞哲學、對記者與大眾角色不同的想像;不同的新聞學原理對新聞實務將造成重大影響,記者與大眾自亦呈現不同的角色定位。即使如此,卻不意味著兩者間不能對話與溝通。透過這兩大新聞理念的分析探討,本文嘗試廓清相關爭議與盲點,期待能在當代新聞低潮時期,尋求一條新的出路。 |
英文摘要 | “investigative journalism” and “public journalism” are two different ideal types of public sphere of journalism. These notions of “public sphere” and “public good” came to ensure the exposure of corruption and the participation of people from community. The principle of “public sphere” coincides with the principles of investigative journalism” and “public journalism”. Although public journalists proclaimed theirs a unique approach to journalism, This paper tries to link investigative journalism and public journalism in some ways. According to completely different journalism philosophy, journalists have different crafts and ethics of journalism. This paper argues that the two journalisms differ in fundamental and largely unexplored ways. It is important for the debate and dialogue between the two journalisms. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。