中国古代经学“述而不作”的传统和具体历史情境的演进脉络皆关乎传播。今古文经之争的内在机理暗藏“口语偏向”与“文本偏向”的传播线索，却尚被遮蔽。今文经因其口语传播偏向显现出通俗的、意义开放的、便于记忆的经学知识体系。口语偏向的今文经具备人类学的在场性，是诠释学意义上“此在”对自身和共在的他人之间的筹划，导向意义理解的开放性。文本偏向的古文经发展出了适合默读的疏、笺和章句等体例。汉字因其表意特征被赋予了内生权威性，文本偏向的古文经存在稳定而意义封闭的知识体系。不同的传播偏向通过塑造相应的知识体系为不同的政治文化提供了枢机。今文经的灵活开放为经世致用辟以空间，其政治思维往往偏好改革以解决社会制度性焦虑；古文经的稳定性知识与倾向于维护政治权威且复古的政治思维紧密联系。今古文经的传播偏向并非被动地被投射到政治场域，而是在具体历史文化情境中被主体性的人建构为非此即彼的两条线索，二者的媒介性型构了不同的知识体系和政治文化。

The tradition of “Shu Er Bu Zuo” in ancient Chinese classics and its evolution within specific historical contexts are fundamentally intertwined with communication. Communication bias of orality and literacy under the dispute of the New Text Classics and the Old Text Classics requires further interpretation. The New Text Classics, exhibiting the oral communication bias, fostered a classical knowledge system characterized by accessibility, open-ended meaning, and memorability. The New Text Classics demonstrated an anthropological presence in their oral tradition. By contrast, the Old Text Classics in written form developed exegetical formats like “shu”, “jian” and “zhangju”, which were well-suited to silent reading. Due to the ideographic nature of Chinese characters, endogenous authority was conferred upon the written words. Consequently, the Old Text Classics established a stable knowledge system. Distinct communication bias shaped corresponding knowledge systems, thereby providing pivotal mechanisms for different political culture. The flexibility and openness of the New Text Classics enabled people to reform to address societal and institutional anxieties. Conversely, the stable knowledge of the Old Text Classics was closely linked with a political mindset inclined to uphold authority and restorationism. The communication bias was not passively projected onto the political field, but was actively constructed as mutually exclusive clues by historical agents. The mediality of the New Text Classics and the Old Text Classics shaped distinct knowledge systems and political cultures.