This study argues that “Acta Diurna” serves as a crucial starting points for tracing the origins of newspapers in the field of news history research and also serves as a significant reflection of the “other” in Chinese news history studies. When discussions on the origins of newspapers first emerged in China, the origins of ancient newspapers from both China and abroad were invariably discussed together, constituting two sides of the same coin in the genesis of ancient periodicals. However, early conversations were more of idle chatter among socialites and did not evolve into genuine academic knowledge. As journalism was introduced to China, descriptions of the origins of ancient newspapers needed to be confirmed in a state that was considered anchored. “Acta Diurna” under the introduction and interpretation by Ge Gongzhen and others, was identified as the origin of Western ancient newspapers and became the “target” for elucidating the origins of ancient Chinese newspapers and Chinese news history research. Yet, in the process of introduction, the method of textual research on “Acta Diurna” was also extended to the research on the origins of ancient Chinese newspapers by Ge Gongzhen and his contemporaries, thereby neglecting the examination and questioning of “physical artifacts”, which led to a scarcity of “physical artifacts” in early Chinese news history research and a tradition of lacking skepticism towards the origins of foreign ancient newspapers. With the emergence of the “Tang Dynasty Theory”, represented by the memorials from the Tang Dynasty’s reporting offices, the influence of “Acta Diurna” as a “tradition” has gradually diminished.