本文選題：聯(lián)合國(guó)世界氣候大會(huì) + 新聞框架��； 參考：《廣西大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：2009年,“聯(lián)合國(guó)世界氣候大會(huì)”在丹麥哥本哈根召開第十五次氣候大會(huì),這次大會(huì)被媒體稱為“自從第二次世界大戰(zhàn)以來最重要的會(huì)議”。在這次大會(huì)期間以及自此之后,有關(guān)“聯(lián)合國(guó)世界氣候大會(huì)”的報(bào)道議題頻繁出現(xiàn)在各國(guó)媒體,對(duì)于“聯(lián)合國(guó)世界氣候大會(huì)”的報(bào)道也逐漸與普通環(huán)境新聞相分離,形成獨(dú)特的報(bào)道模式。在全球環(huán)境問題日益嚴(yán)峻,氣候問題上升到政治經(jīng)濟(jì)問題的今天,各國(guó)媒體如何在這樣重要的世界大會(huì)上為本國(guó)爭(zhēng)奪話語(yǔ)權(quán),就顯得格外重要。在報(bào)道中,受到各自所屬利益集團(tuán)的影響和新聞理念的不同,以《人民日?qǐng)?bào)》和《華盛頓郵報(bào)》為代表的中美媒體,必然使用不同的新聞框架來影響受眾,以達(dá)到為各自的利益集團(tuán)發(fā)聲的目的。 本文以《人民日?qǐng)?bào)》和《華盛頓郵報(bào)》對(duì)2009年-2013年5年間對(duì)“聯(lián)合國(guó)世界氣候大會(huì)”的全部報(bào)道為研究樣本,運(yùn)用新聞框架理論和批評(píng)性話語(yǔ)分析理論,將定性研究和定量研究相結(jié)合,探尋中美兩大媒體在報(bào)道中是如何運(yùn)用新聞框架,以達(dá)到各自的話語(yǔ)目的,并且分析了造成這種差異的原因,最后提出了《人民日?qǐng)?bào)》等中國(guó)媒體應(yīng)當(dāng)如何向《華盛頓郵報(bào)》借鑒其巧妙的新聞框架,更好地平衡新聞客觀性和傾向性之間的關(guān)系,以期為其成為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)世界話語(yǔ)權(quán)的大媒體奠定基礎(chǔ)。同時(shí)也提出了在借鑒《華盛頓郵報(bào)》新聞框架的同時(shí),中國(guó)新聞媒體需要規(guī)避的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。 經(jīng)過研究,本文得出結(jié)論：首先,在高層次框架上,《華盛頓郵報(bào)》傾向于將“世界氣候大會(huì)”定位在政治,經(jīng)濟(jì)以及其它議題均衡分布,《人民日?qǐng)?bào)》傾向于將“世界氣候大會(huì)”定義為單一的政治議題；其次,在中層級(jí)框架上,《華盛頓郵報(bào)》傾向于使用沖突框架和負(fù)面評(píng)估,《人民日?qǐng)?bào)》傾向于使用宣傳框架和正面評(píng)估；第三,在低層次框架上,《華盛頓郵報(bào)》在文章的具體語(yǔ)言使用上卻巧妙的體現(xiàn)了其的傾向性,《人民日?qǐng)?bào)》的傾向性則更加明顯。總體來看,《華盛頓郵報(bào)》傳達(dá)傾向性的手法更加隱晦,通過潛移默化的語(yǔ)言來影響受眾；《人民日?qǐng)?bào)》對(duì)于新聞客觀性與傾向性的平衡上掌握則不夠巧妙。
[Abstract]:In 2009, the UN World Climate Conference held its fifteenth climate conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, which the media called "the most important conference since the second World War." During this conference and since then, the coverage of the "United Nations World Climate Conference" appeared frequently in the national media, and the coverage of the "United Nations World Climate Conference" was gradually separated from the general environmental news. Form a unique reporting model. With the global environmental problem becoming more and more serious and the climate problem rising to the political and economic problem, it is particularly important for the media of various countries to fight for the right to speak for their own country in such an important world conference. In reporting, influenced by their respective interest groups and different news ideas, the Chinese and American media represented by "People's Daily" and "Washington Post" must use different news frameworks to influence the audience. In order to achieve the purpose of speaking out for their respective interest groups. Based on the People's Daily and Washington Post reports on the United Nations World Climate Conference from 2009 to 2013, this paper applies the news framework theory and critical discourse analysis theory. Combining qualitative and quantitative studies, this paper explores how the two major media in China and the United States use the news framework in their reports in order to achieve their respective discourse purposes, and analyzes the reasons for this difference. Finally, the author puts forward how Chinese media, such as "People's Daily", should learn from the Washington Post's clever news framework to better balance the relationship between objectivity and tendentiousness of news. With a view to its leadership of the world as the voice of the media to lay the foundation. At the same time, the paper puts forward the risk that Chinese news media should avoid while drawing on the news framework of the Washington Post. After study, this paper concludes that, first of all, in a high-level framework, the Washington Post tends to position the "World Climate Conference" as a political one. With a balanced distribution of economic and other issues, < People's Daily > tends to define "World Climate Conference" as a single political issue. In the middle level framework, the Washington Post tends to use conflict frameworks and negative assessments, and < People's Daily > to use propaganda frameworks and positive assessments; third, In the low-level framework, the Washington Post skillfully embodies its tendency in the specific language use of the article, and the tendency of < People's Daily > is even more obvious. In general, the Washington Post conveys bias in a more subtle way, influencing the audience through subtle language, while < People's Daily > is not clever enough to master the balance between objectivity and orientation of news.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣西大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：G212

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李智;;對(duì)文化軟權(quán)力化的一種傳播學(xué)解讀[J];當(dāng)代傳播;2008年03期

2 周素珍;余建清;;社會(huì)沖突事件報(bào)道中的新聞框架及其運(yùn)用[J];東南傳播;2009年10期

3 史安斌,周慶安;新聞構(gòu)架、符碼與制造同意的藝術(shù)——美國(guó)媒體“十六大”報(bào)道綜合分析[J];國(guó)際新聞界;2003年02期

4 張威;;環(huán)境報(bào)道的宣傳色彩與新聞的客觀性[J];國(guó)際新聞界;2007年10期

5 李燕;;批評(píng)話語(yǔ)分析的語(yǔ)言學(xué)基礎(chǔ):系統(tǒng)功能語(yǔ)言學(xué)[J];科教文匯(中旬刊);2008年07期

6 晨曦;許多;;媒介框架視角下的哥本哈根會(huì)議報(bào)道——以《人民日?qǐng)?bào)》和《南方都市報(bào)》的相關(guān)報(bào)道為例[J];新聞世界;2010年04期

7 孔霜梅;張發(fā)祥;;透視新聞報(bào)道中的傾向性——從及物性和情態(tài)的視角分析ABC新聞“Taiwan Rejects China's Offer of Pandas”[J];四川教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年03期

8 陳中竺;批評(píng)語(yǔ)言學(xué)述評(píng)[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;1995年01期

9 辛斌;語(yǔ)言、權(quán)力與意識(shí)形態(tài):批評(píng)語(yǔ)言學(xué)[J];現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ);1996年01期

10 王積龍;;美國(guó)環(huán)境新聞的社會(huì)控制研究[J];西南民族大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社科版);2008年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：1946230