PDF(1531 KB)
PDF(1531 KB)
PDF(1531 KB)
重建坐标再出发：新闻学范式创新的基本路径与关键问题
Rebuilding the coordinates and restarting: Approaches and Critical Issues of the Paradigm Conversion of Journalism Study
新闻学在前互联网时代积累起来的认知前提、经验基础、知识体系、理论逻辑等都正在经历重大挑战，集中体现为新闻学的范式危机。新闻学范式创新的基本思路是首先面向实践提问，然后从问题中抽象出理论化的、稳定的概念体系，以此完成知识的扩充，再通过认识论和方法论层面的更新来保障知识扩充的效率和效果，最后通过价值层面的检验来确保知识的反思性和实践性。作为一项系统性学术工程，新闻学创新需要解决几个关键问题：在范式意义上重新开掘和书写新闻理论史，对互联网时代新的新闻现象的“概念化”和“问题化”，推进从微观问题分析到宏观体系构建的光谱式序列化探究，提升认识论和方法论层面的自觉性、规范性和创新性，在多重研究路径中寻求与建立共识。新闻学范式创新的目标不仅是提出一个或多个具有范式意义的理论体系，而是搭建起扎根于中国新闻实践和中国学术传统的理论旨趣上有共识、方法路径可通约、具体观点能互鉴的新闻学学术生态。
Journalism studies faces great challenges in terms of cognitive premises, experiential grounding, knowledge system, and the logic of theory. These challenges accumulated in the pre-Internet era reflected the crisis of the paradigm of journalism study. There are complicated approaches to accelerate the paradigm innovation, which contains exploring questions oriented to practice, obtaining abstract theories and stable concept system based on questions, complicating the expansion of knowledge, ensuring the efficiency and effect of knowledge expansion by updating the epistemology and methodology, and achieving a reflective and practical knowledge system through axiology. As a systematic project, paradigm innovation needs to solve five key issues. The first issue is to explore and rewrite the history of journalism theory according to the paradigm. The second one is conceptualizing and problematizing the new phenomena of journalism in the Internet era. The third issue is promoting the spectral serialization exploration from the micro problems to the macro construction. The remaining issues are improving the conscious standardization and innovation of epistemology and methodology and establishing consensus in multiple research paths. The objective of paradigm innovation of journalism study is not only to put forward some theoretical structure of knowledge, but also to build an academic ecology of journalism study which rooted in the Chinese journalistic practice and Chinese academic tradition, has consensus on theories and methods, and can learn from each other on specific viewpoints.
| [1] |
常江(2020). 数字新闻学:一种理论体系的想象与建构. 《新闻记者》,(2),12-20+31.
|
| [2] |
黄旦(2015). 重造新闻学——网络化关系的视角. 《国际新闻界》,(1),75-88.
|
| [3] |
兰德尔·柯林斯, 迈克尔·马科夫斯基(2010/2014). 《发现社会:西方社会学思想述评》(第八版)(李霞译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
|
| [4] |
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.
|
| [5] |
李艳红(2021). 学科范式·创新路径·拓展传承——厘清数字新闻学理论创新的几个问题. 《新闻记者》,(10),19-36.
|
| [6] |
马克斯·韦伯(1917、1919/2021). 《以学术为业:1917、1919 以政治为业:1919》(吕叔君译). 北京: 人民出版社.
|
| [7] |
莫伊舍·普殊同(1993/2019). 《时间、劳动与社会统治:马克思的批判理论再阐释》(康凌译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
|
| [8] |
涂凌波(2021). “以中国为方法”:新闻学理论范式转换的逻辑、知识与方法论. 《新闻与写作》,(11),38-47.
|
| [9] |
托马斯·库恩, 伊安·哈金(1970/2012). 《科学革命的结构》(金吾伦,胡新和译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
|
| [10] |
王斌(2020). 互联网新闻学:一种对新闻学知识体系的反思. 《编辑之友》,(8),63-74.
|
| [11] |
杨保军, 李泓江(2020). 新闻学的范式转换:从职业性到社会性. 《新闻与传播研究》,(8),5-25+126.
|
| [12] |
This brief article presents some remarks about the material turn in journalism studies. It argues that this turn might push these studies in a more cosmopolitan theoretical direction by inviting analysts to engage with a wide array of fields of inquiry. It also contends that this turn might unsettle two major common methodological practices in studies of newswork: a focus on journalists and on newsrooms as the critical actors and locales. Looking at the objects of newsmaking might reveal the broad spectrum of actors implicated in this process—not just journalists—and the spatially distributed network of connections—that include the newsroom as one key locale, but not the only one—from which the news emerges.
|
| [13] |
Observing the limitations driven by a certain path-dependency in most scholarship on digital journalism, we argue for favouring a direction that privileges "digital" over "journalism". Rather than seeing it as a digital iteration of journalistic principles, as has been a persistent theme in academia to date, it would see consider journalism as an embodiment of digital principles, one of the many domains of social life which is increasingly restructured around digital technologies. Digitisation sets the agenda for journalism to follow, rather than journalism setting the agenda for its digital incarnation to live up to-or not. Such an approach is a continuation of existing but limited scholarship which could open up new paths and expand current avenues of research, and reflects an emerging paradigm where digitisation is the dominant partner.
|
| [14] |
This article argues that the social scientific epistemology that has dominated journalism for the past half-century has devalued the moral implications of public affairs and deprived citizens of the ethical tools necessary to make humane political decisions. Reviewing the contingent history of the integration of journalistic and social scientific methods leading to journalism's computational turn, the essay calls for a humanistic reconceptualization away from journalists' role as political interpreters toward a comparable role as moral interpreters.
|
| [15] |
This article analyses the characteristics of digital journalism studies through an empirical investigation of all articles published in the journal Digital Journalism, from its launch in 2013 to issue 6, 2018. The aim of the analysis is to identify dominant themes and degrees of diversity and interdisciplinary in digital journalism studies, and to identify biases and blind spots. The article is based on analysis of keywords, abstracts and references used in all articles published in the journal. The findings suggest that while the research published in Digital Journalism is firmly situated within journalism studies, it has a stronger emphasis on technology, platforms, audience and the present. The article also finds that digital journalism studies, as seen in Digital Journalism, is dominated by perspectives from the social sciences, while largely ignoring digital journalism as a meaning-making system, and that the field of research could benefit from the application of theories and perspectives from the humanities and to some extent from theoretical computer science and informatics. Finally, the article argues that digital journalism studies suffers from a lack of connections between empirical research and the many conceptual discussions that dominate the (sub)field.
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
This article develops the idea of an "emotional turn" in journalism studies, which has led to an increasingly nuanced investigation of the role of emotion in the production, texts and audience engagement with journalism. These developments have occurred in tandem with, and accelerated by, the emergence of digital and social media. Research on news production has shown that journalistic work has always taken emotion into consideration, shaping approaches to storytelling and presentation. However, the view of journalists as detached observers has rendered the emotional labor associated with news production invisible. Research on emotion in journalistic texts has highlighted the fact that even conventional "hard news genres" are shaped by an engagement with emotion. As studies on news audiences and emotions have shown, audiences are more likely to be emotionally engaged, recall information and take action when news stories are relatable. The affordances of digital platforms and social media have had a profound impact on the space for emotion. The expanded opportunities for participation have contributed to questioning traditional distinctions between news audiences and producers and have ushered in new and more forms of emotional expression that have spilled over into practices of news production.
|
| [19] |
This article addresses the relationship between digital technology and journalism, arguing that defining journalism in conjunction with its technology short-circuits a comprehensive picture of journalism. Not only does it obscure the incremental nature and detrimental effects of change in journalism, but it sidelines the recognition of what stays stable in journalism across technological change. Tracing the advantages and shortcomings of expectations that digital journalism is more democratic, transparent, novel and participatory, the article argues that it is journalism that gives technology purpose, shape, perspective, meaning and significance, not the other way around.
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
