台海分治初期兩岸報業之比較分析（1949-1958）

Like Regime, Like Newspaper: Comparative Analysis on Newspaper Industries across Taiwan Strait (1949-1958)

葉言都(Yeh-Tu Yeh)

指導教授 ： 胡平生

國立臺灣大學/文學院/歷史學研究所/博士(2010年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2010.00605

摘要

台海分治初期兩岸報業之比較分析（1949-1958）

摘 要
自從1949年起，中國國民黨執政的中華民國與中國共產黨執政的中華人民共和國隔著台灣海峽展開長期的對立。台灣與中國大陸兩地在國、共的不同統治下，從此出現迥然相異的發展與演變。對台灣海峽兩岸的各行各業而言，當時可說同時進行著兩大批的無數種試驗，這些試驗集合起來，就成為雙方不同制度下的整體表現，造成整體結果，影響及於各自領域內的工作、生活與文化。
報業是當時最重要的新聞媒體產業，受到國、共雙方政府的高度重視。台海分治剛開始時，大陸、台灣兩地的報業經營環境本有諸多相同之處；但隨著雙方政府推出許多不同的報業政策，台海兩岸遂被塑造出不同的報業發展環境。兩岸的報業因此進行了一場不同政治體制下的對比實驗，結果不到十年，約至1958年時雙方已經演化成高度不同的體系，大陸報業成為標準的極權（totalitarian）統治下報業體系，台灣報業則成為威權（authoritarian）統治下報業體系的典型。
本文針對此種歷史背景，將報業當作「有關報紙的產業」來研究，內容包括當時兩岸報紙的生產、銷售與經營管理各方面，並不僅限於編輯、採訪與言論；對象則為與這些方面有關的團體與個人，也並不僅限於報社。其目的在以比較的方式，研討台海分治後十年之間造成兩岸報業差異的機制究竟何在？極權與威權統治下的報業各自如何因應？又造成何種結果？本文是對現代中華文化圈中的不同領域進行比較歷史研究的嘗試，研究方法以歷史學為主，並應用到新聞學、政治學、社會學、企業管理學與會計學等的相關知識。
中共將報業視為黨的喉舌、宣傳的工具，控制報業不遺餘力，唯其方法則甚為靈活而有彈性。1949年台海分治伊始，中共即著手建立層級制的公營報業體系，但仍容許部份私營報業存在。隨著極權統治的確立，大陸報業的人力、原料、資金、新聞來源、發行通路與市場等資源全部被中共掌控，殘存的私營報業在數年之間消亡。中共以極權統治徹底掌控報業，也就壟斷了蘊含在報業中的社會資本，極權統治下的報業遂成為維護極權統治的工具，也是極權政權的一部分。
同一時期撤退至台灣的國民黨政府則內外交困，只能採取鎮壓與妥協並存的方式，形成威權統治。威權統治者以報禁的方式為台灣報業加上許多禁忌與框架，卻也在框架內保留了一些領域如社會及犯罪新聞、設備與資金供應、發行市場、廣告市場等讓報業從事有限度的自由競爭。結果十年之間，屬於黨、政、軍單位的官營報業已經開始從絕對領先的優勢退潮；擅於掌握機會以資本主義方式競爭的民營報業，則逐步開發台灣社會中的資源，累積社會資本，完成與台灣經濟發展同步壯大的準備，奠定超越官營報業的基礎。
十年的時間在歷史長河中不過轉瞬，但已經長到足夠在兩個彼此因政治而分隔的區域中，創造出兩種高度不同的報業體系。由此看來，一個國家或政權以特殊統治方式創造出境內相應的報業體系，實際上僅需將近十年的時間。報業做為一種產業，畢竟仍是環境的產物；而報業做為大眾傳播媒體產業，對環境尤其敏感。
台海既然分治，報業必定分途；因為，有其國，則必有其報。

關鍵字

報業 ； 台海分治 ； 極權政權 ； 威權政權 ； 比較分析。

並列摘要

Like Regime, Like Newspaper:
Comparative Analysis on Newspaper Industries
across Taiwan Strait (1949-1958)

Abstract
Ever since 1949, across Taiwan strait, the Republic of China on Taiwan ruled by Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuo Min Tang, KMT) and the People’s Republic of China on Chinese Mainland ruled by Chinese Communist Party (CCP) were antagonist to each other for a long time. Far-reaching changes were mandated both in Taiwan and Mainland China by the two regimes while communications between people on both sides of Taiwan strait were banned, and later vanished. Thus, to all professions across Taiwan strait, two groups of numerous experiments were performed at the same time. The experiences and consequences of these experiments influenced the working conditions, lives and cultures on both territories and evidenced distinction between the two national systems.
As the most important media at the time, newspaper industry was highly regarded by both KMT and CCP. Although in the beginning of the political separation, newspaper industries across Taiwan strait were quite similar, the many newspaper policies raised by the two governments molded different environments for the industry. Experiments of newspaper industry under different regimes were taken place from then on. Within ten years, the newspaper industries evolved seperately across the strait, and around 1958, divergent newspaper systems appeared. Newspaper industry in Mainland China became a typical example of the industry under totalitarian regime, while newspaper industry in Taiwan showed itself a model of the industry under authoritarian regime.
Base on the above historical background, what was the mechanism that caused and shaped different newspaper industries across Taiwan strait? How did newspaper industry respond to totalitarian or authoritarian ruling? What factors that differentiated authoritarianism from totalitarianism can be reached through the examples in newspaper industry? These questions reckon the necessity of comparative study on the same industry in two isolated and widely different regions during the same time period. This dissertation tries to be contributive to the answers.
Newspaper industry is considered and studied here with its entire functionality. Not only are news reporting, editing and editorial writing examined, but newspaper’s producing, sales and management are also studied. Comparative historical analysis is applied as the main methodology with the assistance of knowledges from journalism, political science, sociology, business administration and accounting.
Acknowledging newapapers as the “tongue and throat to the party” and tool for propaganda, CCP spared no effort to control newspaper industry. However, it’s means and artifices were nimble and flexible. From 1949, CCP elaborated a government-owned hierarchy newspaper system. Party leaders directed newspapers owned and operated by central to local governments, while tolerated temporary existence of some privately-owned newspapers. Following the establishment of the regime, CCP seized newspaper industry’s resources such as manpower, materials, financial supply, news announcing, circulation channels and market throughout Mainland China. The number of remaining privately-owned newspapers and circulation and advertising agent houses declined sharply and eventually died out in a few years. When CCP had monopolized the newspaper industry, consequently, it had monopolized the social capitals contained in the industry. Newspapers in the totalitarian country became part of the regime itself.
On the other side of the strait, the retreating and exhausted KMT faced difficulties inside and outside Taiwan. For surviving, the adoption of a two-handed policy, with both suppressions and compromises was inevitable, which made the ROC of Taiwan an authoritarian country. Government’s publication moratorium and journalistic taboos set walls around newspaper industry, but also kept potential competitors away. Among the coexisting, fixed-numbered newspapers, those owned by government or KMT were in leading positions in 1949. However, due to the realism of authoritarianism, some “reservations,” such as social and crime news, popular supply and circulation markets, and advertisements had been made by the government for other newspapers to maneuver their future with free competition in these areas. Privately-owned newspapers utilized the opportunities created by these “reservations” to compete capitalistically. In ten years, resources contained in Taiwanese societies were gradually excavated and transferred to privately-owned newspapers when social capitals were being accumulated by them; meanwhile government- and KMT-owned newspapers began to ebb. Preparation for privately-owned newspapers to meet the further economic development and foundation for them to exceed government- and KMT-owned newspapers were established in this period of time.
Ten years were short in history, yet long enough to create two completely different newspaper industries in two areas that were politically separated and isolated to each other. It was the decade right after the split in 1949 that the two regimes across Taiwan strait, CCP’s totalitarian and KMT’s authoritarian, formed newspaper industries based on each one’s political ideology. So ten years are long enough to have a specific newspaper industry appear under a regime’s specific ruling. Sensitive to its environment as any other news media is, newspaper industry is a product of the regime that brings about the media industry’s environment.
Like regime, like newspaper.

並列關鍵字

newspaper industry ； political separation across Taiwan strait ； totalitarian regime ； authoritarian regime ； comparative analysis.

參考文獻

《文匯報》（上海）

《中央日報》（台北）。

中央改造委員會編，《中國國民黨中央改造委員會一年來工作報告》。台北：編者出版，1951。

中國國民黨中央委員會設計考核委員會編，《如何革除社會新聞的弊害》。台北：中國國民黨中

編輯委員會編，《一九四九：中國的關鍵年代學術討論會論文集》。台北：國史館，2000。