從禽流感新聞報導看媒體的風險敘事策略-比較紐約時報、聯合報與蘋果日報

An analysis of risk news: A comparative study of the news of Avian Influenza in the New York Times, the United Daily News,and the Apple Daily

胡之瑋(Chih-Wei Hu)

指導教授 ： 張錦華

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/新聞研究所/碩士(2007年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2007.00381

摘要

本研究以禽流感新聞報導作為研究對象，關注在風險社會中的新聞媒體如何呈現風險事件。以國內外三家報紙--紐約時報、聯合報與蘋果日報--為取樣對象，比較三報是否呈現不同敘事特色，又反映出什麼樣的風險文化。
研究方法分為兩部份，一為量化分析，使用SPSS12.0統計軟體，並以卡方檢定處理三報間類別項目的比較。質化分析則以新聞敘事理論發展的分析架構，分析禽流感新聞內容。
量化研究發現，媒體往往在風險事件發生後，才有大量報導產生，在風險事件爆發之前，具前瞻性的報導與討論是很少的。此外，三報在「新聞主題」與「消息來源」的使用上沒有差異，皆偏重「傷亡疫情」主題以及使用「專家系統」發言。但在「新聞版面」、「新聞屬性」、「新聞篇幅」、「新聞撰寫角度」、「專家系統」、「新聞圖表」選用上差異皆大。
敘事分析發現，三報呈現出截然不同的敘事策略。紐約時報善以多變化的導言、生動的「故事法」作為新聞引導，配合分析解釋性文字、鋪陳歷史背景與類比事件，加入大量記者評論、多元專家對話與新聞主角的氣質描述，具有深度報導的特質。聯合報則以特派員報導與專題為主，主觀報導第一手觀點資訊。並且重視新聞馴化與社會心理問題，在新聞中試圖以文字降低恐慌。蘋果日報則以速食型、視覺化、多點式的敘事方式，以較為聳動的標題、簡短的內文、豐富的圖表敘述風險事件。並且掌握說服理論的要點，提供簡單、可行、清楚易懂的條列式避險資訊。然而蘋果日報與聯合報缺乏多元消息來源與不同風險觀的討論，反映台灣在地社會「風險遲滯性」的問題，此點與紐約時報差異最大。
本研究結論一共有四點：一、三報之風險敘事差異反映不同媒介邏輯，提供不同風險傳播功能。二、風險遲滯型社會形成媒體報導的侷限，即缺乏多元消息來源。三、風險報導主題偏重傷亡疫情，不因社會文化不同而異。四、風險知識平等化尚未成形，風險報導依賴專家系統，未能跳脫格式化的消息來源。

關鍵字

風險社會、禽流感、新聞報導、新聞敘事、內容分析、風險遲滯型社會

並列摘要

This paper deals with the news coverage of Avian Influenza in the New York Times, the United Daily, and the Apple Daily, and it compares among the three newspapers how they represent the risk events.

The thesis consists of two major parts, quantity analysis and quality analysis. The former examines the different attributes of the three newspapers according to the results of statistics. The latter explores the important narrative strategies and elements used in the news texts.

A tendency found in the quantity analysis is the three newspapers’ generally lack of prospect ability. They pay attention to risk events and produce lots of relevant reports only when heavy casualties occur in the risks. That is, the number of report about the risk is noticeably increasing only after the risk has occurred and caused high casualties. In addition, this paper analyzes the news text by dividing them into nine categories, demonstrating that the three newspapers show no difference in determining the “News Topic” and in using “News Sources”. But the differences exist in the “News Sections”, “News Genres”, “Wordage”, “Writing angles”, “Experts”, and “Charts and Tables”.

The results of narrative analysis show contrasting narrative strategies in the three newspapers. The New York Times is characterized by its varied introduction words, especially the story-telling way of narration. Besides, the deep explanations, comments, and background conditions of the event are given in the news text. The United Daily News is characterized by its designated topics of Avian Influenza and the first-hand information reported by the correspondents. Also, it pays more attention to the social psychological aspects and domesticates the foreign risk events. The Apple Daily, the most sensational one, is characterized by the negative news titles, brief descriptions and multi-spots information. However, the simple rules and clear charts about how to avoid risks and how the risks occur provide the readers with feasible and persuasive suggestions.

In the conclusion, this paper suggests that: 1. The different strategies of the three newspapers reflect the different media logics and serve the different functions of communication. 2. The delayed high-tech society (Taiwan) leads to the lack of the multiple news sources in the news coverage. 3. The news topics of risk events in the three newspapers all draw on the harms and deaths, no matter their different cultural contexts. 4. The risk knowledge has not been equalized among the public. In other words, the news coverage of the risk events has no difference in using uniformed sources. That is, the role of defining risks largely falls on the experts instead of the lay people.

並列關鍵字

risk society, Avian Influenza, news coverage, narrative analysis, content analysis, delayed high-tech society

參考文獻

14. 周桂田(1998)。〈現代性與風險社會〉，《台灣社會學刊》，21：89-129。

26. 陳世英(2006)。〈從SARS到禽流感：現代社會對新興傳染性疾病的重新檢視〉，《健康世界》，242：11-27。

2. 方念萱(2004)。〈SARS新聞報導的幾個分析觀點〉，《傳播研究簡訊》，37：5-7。

16. 周桂田(2004)。〈獨大的科學理性與隱沒(默)的社會理性之對話：在地公眾、科學專家與國家的風險文化探討〉，《臺灣社會研究》，56：1-63。

23. 徐美苓(2003)。〈愛滋陰影下的情慾規範：新聞論述中的他�她者建構〉，《臺灣社會研究》，50：81-143。