尽管不少研究关注到媒介与抗争的关系，大部分研究倾向于将媒介作为抗争工具和策略加以理解，或仅仅关注媒介内容、媒介框架对抗争事件的呈现，未将整个媒介生态对抗争的影响看成一个系统的动态过程。本文以“媒介逻辑”作为核心性分析框架，系统考察了不同类型的媒介逻辑如何共同作用于抗争这一特定社会领域。对发生于2003-2012年间的40个拆迁抗争案例的模糊集定性比较分析发现，媒介的内容逻辑比技术逻辑、制度逻辑更具影响力，但内容逻辑的影响力镶嵌于而不是独立于政治制度。虽然技术逻辑和制度逻辑自身无法有效解释抗争成功，但三种媒介逻辑之间存在相互强化的效应，在内容逻辑基础上引入其他二者将大大提高“媒介逻辑”对抗争成功的整体影响。总之，本研究在经验上初步验证了整合的“媒介逻辑”理论框架的解释力。

Although many studies have examined the relationship between the media and protests, most of them tend to conceive the media as a strategic means of claims-making, or merely pay attention to media content or framework of the events, and thus fail to understand the impact of the media ecology as a dynamic system in a holistic fashion. Based on the analytical framework of "media logic", this study systematically examines how different types of media logic work together to shape the dynamics of protests, a particular social domain of great significance. Based on fuzzy set qualitative Comparative Analysis of 40 cases of demolition resistance occurred in 2003-2012, this study finds that content logic is more influential than technical logic and the institutional logic, but the former’s influence is embedded in rather than independent of the political system. Although technical logic and institutional logic cannot effectively explain the success of protests, the effects of these three types of media logic tend to mutually reinforce, and their co-presence will greatly enhance the chances of the success of protests. In all, this study empirically supports the theoretical framework of "media logic".