Through the critique of American journalism history studies by Jams W. Carey, this study argues the limitations of traditional journalism history studies to evaluate the achievements of Taiwanese journalism history studies. Whether in the East or the West, both regard journalism as a social institution whose legitimation depends on the accomplishment of democracy and neglect the journalism's cultural meanings or other social dimensions. This paper proposes to apply the concepts of paradigm and cultural history to reinterpret the historical transformation of journalism. A paradigm not only means a different worldview, but also a distinct scheme based on a specific social imagination, and it is the variety of social imagination that makes multiple journalistic practice and cultural meanings possible.