PDF(1674 KB)
PDF(1674 KB)
PDF(1674 KB)
从“挣工分”到“挣流量”:绩效制度下的市场、共谋与流量锦标赛
From “Earned Work” to “Earned Flow”: Market, Conspiracy and Flow Tournaments in a Performance-based System
数字技术引发新闻业盈利危机,新闻机构和新闻工作者开始重新“发掘”以往不受重视的受众,并通过各种测量技术获取受众的反馈。流量成为新闻生产的“指挥棒”与“评判官”,但关于流量的劳动问题研究却一直是一个盲点。从“挣工分”到“挣流量”,互联网技术催生的“计流量制”绩效考核制度,逐渐取代传统媒体时代“计件制”的主导地位,新闻编辑室内生出一种流量锦标赛机制。以流量论英雄的评优机制,强化新闻编辑室的流量文化,压倒了更成熟的专业价值理念,并通过评报这一仪式化机制,重申和确认新闻生产中“流量逻辑”的合法性。作为一种批判性的分析,本文旨在通过对新闻记者“挣流量”劳动与新闻编辑室“流量锦标赛”的批判性检视,来反思受众地位的上升对新闻记者职业文化权威的挑战与侵蚀,并重新审视市场话语对新闻业公共价值的“殖民”。
Digital technology has triggered a crisis in the profitability of journalism. News organizations and journalists have begun to rediscover previously unappreciated audiences and obtain feedback from them through various measurement techniques. Traffic has become the “baton” and “judge” of news production. But research on the labour aspects of traffic has been a blind spot. From “earning work points” to “earning traffic”, the “traffic counting system” performance appraisal system spawned by Internet technology has gradually replaced the dominance of the “piecework system” in the traditional media era. A traffic tournament mechanism has emerged within the newsroom. The meritocracy, which is based on traffic, reinforces the culture of traffic in newsrooms, overrides more established professional values, and reaffirms and confirms the legitimacy of the “logic of traffic” in news production through the ritualized mechanism of newspaper evaluation. As a critical analysis, this paper aims to reflect on the challenge and erosion of journalists’ professional cultural authority by the rise of the audience through a critical examination of journalists' “traffic-earning” labour and newsrooms’ “traffic tournaments”, and to re-examine the “colonization” of public values in journalism by market discourse.
挣流量 / 挣工分 / 计件制 / 计流量制 / 绩效考核 / 流量锦标赛
make flow / earn work point / piecework system / flow meter system / performance appraisal / traffic tournament
| [1] |
白红义(2018). 因时而作:新闻时间性的再考察. 《国际新闻界》,(6),46-67.
|
| [2] |
白红义(2019). 点击改变新闻业?——受众分析技术的采纳、使用与意涵. 《南京社会科学》,(6),99-108.
|
| [3] |
曹林(2021). 那张业务桌子让我们对抗着流量焦虑——访中国青年报《冰点周刊》主编从玉华. 《青年记者》,(1),27-29.
|
| [4] |
陈昶文(2019). “流量逻辑”如何影响内容生产?——基于微信公众号的实证考察. 《新闻春秋》,(5),4-13+20.
|
| [5] |
陈阳(2019). 每日推送10次意味着什么?——关于微信公众号生产过程中的新闻节奏的田野观察与思考. 《新闻记者》,(9),23-31.
|
| [6] |
杜骏飞(2018). 新闻是人,新闻学是人学. 《国际新闻界》,(2),22-29.
|
| [7] |
辜晓进(2017). 传播数据监测与分析:大屏统治下的美国报纸编辑部——美国报业转型观察之一. 《新闻记者》,(10),54-58.
|
| [8] |
哈特穆特·罗萨(2013/2018). 《新异化的诞生:社会加速批判理论大纲》(郑作彧译). 上海, 上海人民出版社.
|
| [9] |
何天平(2021). 在公共性和商业化之间;反思平台型媒体的“流量崇拜”与生态治理. 《青年记者》,(3),16-17.
|
| [10] |
赫伯特·甘斯(1979/2009). 《什么在决定新闻》(石琳,李红涛译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
|
| [11] |
黄旦(2015). 重造新闻学——网络化关系的视角. 《国际新闻界》,(1),75-88.
|
| [12] |
蒋淑媛, 黄彬(2020). 当“文艺青年”成为“数字劳工”:对网络作家异化劳动的反思. 《中国青年研究》,(12),23-29+37.
|
| [13] |
雷磊(2021). 前调查记者自述:我曾以为自己能干到退休. 检索于 https://www.lizhi.fm/1052148/5167511969834379782.
|
| [14] |
李艳红, 陈鹏(2016). “商业主义”统合与“专业主义”离场:数字化背景下中国新闻业转型的话语形构及其构成作用. 《国际新闻界》,(9),135-153.
|
| [15] |
刘鹏(2019). 用户新闻学:新传播格局下新闻学开启的另一扇门. 《新闻与传播研究》,(2),5-18+126.
|
| [16] |
刘鹏(2020). “全世界都在说”:新冠疫情中的用户新闻生产研究. 《国际新闻界》,(9),62-84.
|
| [17] |
陆晔, 潘忠党(2002). 成名的想象:社会转型过程中新闻从业者的专业主义话语建构. 《新闻学研究》(台湾),(4),17-59.
|
| [18] |
潘忠党, 陆晔(2017). 《走向公共:新闻专业主义再出发》. 《国际新闻界》,(10),91-124.
|
| [19] |
彭兰(2021). 算法社会的“囚徒”风险. 《全球传媒学刊》,(1),3-18.
|
| [20] |
彭增军(2021). 此间再无萧萧竹:新闻荒漠化及其后果. 《新闻记者》,(3),56-62.
|
| [21] |
孙晓娥(2012). 深度访谈研究方法的实证论析. 《西安交通大学学报(社会科学版)》,(3),101-106.
|
| [22] |
汪抒(2019). 正视新媒体生态中的“流量”. 《青年记者》,(24),27.
|
| [23] |
王辰瑶(2018). 反观诸己:美国“新闻业危机”的三种话语. 《国际新闻界》,(8),25-45.
|
| [24] |
王辰瑶(2020). 新闻创新研究:概念、路径、使命. 《新闻与传播研究》,(3),37-53+126-127.
|
| [25] |
王芳(2019). 超竞争环境下图书营销的顾客战略——以大学出版社教材产品为例. 《编辑学刊》,(3),23-28.
|
| [26] |
王维佳, 周弘(2021). 流量新闻中的“零工记者”:数字劳动转型与西方新闻记者角色的变迁. 《新闻与写作》,(2),14-21.
|
| [27] |
王毓莉(2018). 台湾四大报新闻记者劳动环境与绩效管理之研究. 《国际新闻界》,(11),44-62.
|
| [28] |
夏倩芳(2013). “挣工分”的政治:绩效制度下的产品、劳动与新闻人. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(9),28-36.
|
| [29] |
夏倩芳, 李婧(2016). 媒介转型与媒体从业者的劳动权保护. 《新闻与传播研究》,(3),38-58+126-127.
|
| [30] |
尹连根(2003). 绩效考评在报纸采编中的调控功能——以南方日报为研究个案. 《新闻界》,(4),4-8.
|
| [31] |
喻文益(2019). “流量为王”的“善”与“恶”——“质量为王”才是真正的“王道”. 《人民论坛》,(6),124-126.
|
| [32] |
赵勋(2008). 《W报社记者绩效考核体系研究》. 西北大学工商管理专业硕士论文.西安.
|
| [33] |
周飞舟(2009). 锦标赛体制. 《社会学研究》,(3),54-77+244.
|
| [34] |
周雪光(2017). 《中国国家治理的制度逻辑:一个组织学研究》. 北京: 生活•读书•新知三联书店.
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
This study sought to empirically test whether exposure to and use of new audience feedback mechanisms have an influence on journalism culture. Specifically, the study was interested in testing whether such mechanisms impact the extent to which journalists perceive changes over time in their role conceptions. Such an exploration is timely and important. The roles journalists conceive of are shaped, in part, by what they think audiences expect from them. Such expectations are now communicated to journalists routinely and easily through new audience feedback mechanisms: reader comments, social media, and web analytics. Based on an online survey of 358 news journalists in Australia, this study found that reading readers' comments frequently is related to an increase in the perceived importance of both consumer and citizen orientations. In contrast, perceived effectiveness of web analytics as audience feedback is related to an increase in the perceived importance of consumer orientation.
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
This study provides a snapshot of the hierarchy-of-influences model in the new media environment through examining the effects of audience web metrics on editors. Surveying 318 gatekeepers, the study found that audience metrics influence editors in gatekeeping. Editors’ likelihood to monitor web metrics is affected by their journalism training. Gatekeepers who attach the importance of high readership to economic benefits are more likely to have different news decisions based on web metrics. The study suggests a revision of the hierarchy-of-influences model with more emphasis being placed on the role of the audience.
|
| [43] |
On newspaper websites, journalists can observe the preferences of the audience in unprecedented detail and for low costs, based on the audience clicks (i.e. page views) for specific news articles. This article addresses whether journalists use this information to cater to audience preferences in their news selection choices. We analyzed the print and online editions of five national newspapers from the Netherlands with a mixed-method approach. Using a cross-lagged analysis covering 6 months, we found that storylines of the most-viewed articles were more likely to receive attention in subsequent reporting, which indicates that audience clicks affect news selection. However, based on interviews with editors we found that they consider the use of this information for news selection to conflict with professional norms. We elaborate on the implications of this discrepancy in the norms and behaviors of journalists, and project directions for future studies.
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |