民意乎？黨意乎？－大陸新京報讀者投書的近用權實踐

九○年代以來，大陸都市報紛紛開闢讀者投書版，公開向社會大眾徵求就公共議題發表個人看法，也從而開敔了大陸媒介讀者投書的近用權實踐。本研究分析了在北京報業市場首創讀者投書版的新京報，發現投書論述主題背後反映的意義，在打造市民輿論平台，確有其一定成效，但卻明顯迴避了同時間台灣及國際傳媒關注的中國負面新聞。同時，在比對同時間新京報的社論論述主題，發現這些看似「民意」的讀者投書，在經過編輯室守門過程後，往往只是「黨意」的再現，亦即再現黨國當局「輿論引導」的框架。研究也發現，新京報讀者投書版主要是中高社會階層發聲的場域，並非任何民眾都可以參與討論的公共論壇。這說明了新京報讀者投書版距離作為哈伯馬斯所謂的公共論壇，必須具備議題開放、參與成員公平的要件，仍有相當差距。

關鍵字

中國大陸傳媒；讀者投書；媒介近用權；輿論引導

並列摘要

Since 1990s, many newspapers of major cities in China opened up op-ed pages, soliciting opinions over public issues from readers. This opened up readers' access right to media in China. In recent years, China has aggressively invested in its rural sector, and one focus was placed on improving human capital, such as compulsory education, health care, and social welfare in order to improve the peasants' quality of life. Nevertheless, it was observed that only the financial support mechanism of compulsory education was set up. while the other two were not initiated. Why did the Chinese government put priority on rural compulsory education and postpone the other two? This paper aims at exploring this question by employing theories of public goods, externality and human capital to examine its rationale. China is not only allocating sufficient financial fund for the rural compulsory education but also setting up the financial support mechanism with a goal of stable development in its rural compulsory education. What are the details of the new mechanism? What is new about it? Will it correct past problems? What are the new problems the new mechanism will face? This paper will also attempt to answer these questions. Taking a case study of Beijing News, a Beijing newspaper which initiated the op-ed page in Beijing. this paper aims at analyzing the significance of op-ed contents. Beijing News's op-ed page as a platform did accomplish its functions in certain areas of public concerns. Nevertheless, the newspaper deliberately skipped those news negative to China's image. Further, those op-ed pieces were likely to be edited before being published. What the above observations imply is that these op-eds only serve the Chinese Communist Party's goal. This paper also projects that op-ed sections in China's media have not achieved the level of what Jurgen Habermas calls ”public forum,” that opens to all people to discuss all issues regardless of social class, race, gender. political faith, and religion.