本文選題：永久性正常貿(mào)易關(guān)系 + 總統(tǒng)言論　； 參考：《北京外國語大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：2000年,美國總統(tǒng)克林頓與國會(huì)就是否通過對(duì)華永久正常貿(mào)易關(guān)系法案進(jìn)行了激烈的辯論,美國媒體也一反常態(tài),在新聞報(bào)道中對(duì)總統(tǒng)政策提出了批評(píng)。研究顯示,媒體在報(bào)道外交政策時(shí)通常與總統(tǒng)保持一致,在報(bào)道中國政策時(shí)尤為如此。但在2000年的永久正常貿(mào)易關(guān)系辯論中,媒體似乎打破了這一模式,展示了自身一定的獨(dú)立性。那么,在2000年的辯論中,美國媒體的立場(chǎng)具體是什么?是“政府的小幫手”,還是有自己獨(dú)立的立場(chǎng)?如果有獨(dú)立立場(chǎng),那么在何種條件下獨(dú)立,獨(dú)立到什么程度?鑒于支持和反對(duì)政策的意見同時(shí)存在并且辯論激烈,媒體如何管理這些意見?媒體的獨(dú)立性又是怎樣在新聞報(bào)道中具體體現(xiàn)出來的?根據(jù)羅伯特·恩特曼(Robert Entman)的瀑布模型(the cascade model),本文提出如下論點(diǎn)：在美國決策高層就外交政策產(chǎn)生嚴(yán)重意見分歧時(shí),媒體不會(huì)簡(jiǎn)單遵循總統(tǒng)觀點(diǎn),而會(huì)通過選擇支持與反對(duì)意見形成自己獨(dú)立的立場(chǎng),并為自身利益服務(wù)。本文的研究方法為內(nèi)容分析。通過總結(jié)克林頓總統(tǒng)就對(duì)華永久正常貿(mào)易關(guān)系發(fā)表的公開演說、文件中的框架(frame),以及《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》與《華盛頓郵報(bào)》對(duì)此問題報(bào)道中的支持與反對(duì)框架,并進(jìn)行內(nèi)容分析,本文否定了瀑布模型的觀點(diǎn)。發(fā)現(xiàn)即使在決策高層產(chǎn)生分歧之時(shí),媒體依舊支持總統(tǒng)；雖然展示出一定的獨(dú)立性,但十分有限。反對(duì)意見雖在新聞報(bào)道中得以呈現(xiàn)(占所有報(bào)道的37%),這些反對(duì)并非來自媒體自身,而僅為媒體對(duì)其他政治參與者觀點(diǎn)的采納和引用。就媒體自身的觀點(diǎn)(通過社論發(fā)表)而言,對(duì)總統(tǒng)的批評(píng)極少。媒體有限的獨(dú)立性是通過選擇支持與反對(duì)該政策的框架實(shí)現(xiàn)的。反對(duì)框架雖然數(shù)量不少,但質(zhì)量較低,對(duì)總統(tǒng)政策能形成實(shí)質(zhì)性挑戰(zhàn)的更是少之又少。此外,反對(duì)聲音大多是缺乏論證的“廉價(jià)交談”(cheap talk),且絕大部分針對(duì)重要性較低的補(bǔ)充性意見提出批評(píng),總統(tǒng)觀點(diǎn)僅遭到很少的挑戰(zhàn)。相反,通過選取支持框架,媒體為總統(tǒng)提供了實(shí)質(zhì)的、有力的幫助。媒體調(diào)整了各個(gè)總統(tǒng)框架在新聞報(bào)道中的地位,強(qiáng)化了與公眾利益息息相關(guān)的框架和意識(shí)形態(tài)色彩較強(qiáng)的框架,弱化了缺乏具體內(nèi)容、側(cè)重措辭渲染的框架。這表現(xiàn)出,媒體雖然仍對(duì)總統(tǒng)表示支持,但己不簡(jiǎn)單是總統(tǒng)的傳話筒,在管理支持與反對(duì)框架的過程中,媒體也顧及了自身的目的和利益。本文對(duì)媒體在美國外交政策報(bào)道中的獨(dú)立性這一問題做出了兩點(diǎn)貢獻(xiàn)：首先,本文擴(kuò)大了此類研究的案例范圍,由前人研究中的軍事沖突案例擴(kuò)大到更為廣泛的非軍事沖突類別,相關(guān)理論將可以得到更多的檢測(cè)。其次,本文提出了更為細(xì)致的研究方法,認(rèn)為獨(dú)立性不僅通過反對(duì)總統(tǒng)實(shí)現(xiàn),媒體如何支持總統(tǒng)也展示了其立場(chǎng)。因此,本文不僅分析反對(duì)框架,還將支持框架納入了研究當(dāng)中。通過對(duì)支持總統(tǒng)政策的框架進(jìn)行具體的分析,可以看出哪些框架被媒體突出、強(qiáng)化,哪些被弱化,由此更好地認(rèn)識(shí)媒體在該問題中的立場(chǎng),以及其獨(dú)立性的體現(xiàn)方式。
[Abstract]:In 2000, the president of the United States, Clinton, held a fierce debate with Congress on whether to pass the permanent normal trade relations bill with China. The American media was also normal, criticizing the presidential policy in the news report. But in the 2000 debate on permanent normal trade relations, the media seemed to break the model and show its own independence. Then, in the 2000 debate, what is the position of the American media? Is it "a small helper of the government" or a stand-alone position? If there is an independent position, what conditions are independent, To what extent is independence? In view of the existence of support and opposition to policy and the intense debate, how does the media manage these opinions? How is the independence of the media embodied in the news reports? According to the the cascade model (the cascade model) of Robert Entenma (Robert Entman), the following arguments are put forward: in the United States The media will not simply follow the president's point of view, but will form its own standpoint by choosing support and opposition and serving its own interests. The research method of this paper is the content analysis. Through the summary of Clinton's general publication of the permanent normal trade relations with China. The speech, the framework (frame) in the document, and the support and opposition framework in the New York Times and Washington Post reports, and the content analysis. This article negates the view of the waterfall model. Although the objections are presented in the news report (37% of all the reports), these objections are not from the media themselves, but only by the media's adoption and reference to the views of other political participants. In terms of the media's own views (published by the editorials), the president is criticized very little. The limited independence of the media is through the choice of support and the support of the media. Against the framework of the policy, the opposition framework, though a large number, has a low quality and less substantial challenges to the president's policy. In addition, the opposition is mostly a "cheap conversation" (cheap talk) lacking argument, and most of them criticize the less important complementarity, the president's view is only On the contrary, through the selection of the support framework, the media provided the president with substantial and powerful help. The media adjusted the status of the various presidential frameworks in the news reports, strengthened the framework and ideological color framework closely related to the public interests, weakened the lack of specific content and focused on the wording frame. This shows that, although the media still supports the president, it is not simply the microphone of the president. In the process of managing support and opposition, the media also takes into account its own goals and interests. This article makes two contributions to the independence of the media in American foreign policy reporting. The scope of the case is expanded from the military conflict cases in previous studies to a wider category of non military conflicts, and the related theories will be more detected. Secondly, this paper puts forward a more detailed study method, and holds that independence is not only through opposition to the president, but also how the media support the president. This paper not only analyzes the framework of opposition, but also integrates the support framework into the study. Through a concrete analysis of the framework for supporting the president's policy, we can see which frames are highlighted by the media, which are strengthened, and which are weakened, thus better understanding the position of the media in this issue and the embodiment of its independence.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：北京外國語大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：F757.12;G212
，

本文編號(hào)：1794926