寻求多元信息输入与理性信息输出的融合——公众的社交媒体使用状态及其对社会治理的影响研究
|
摘要
[目的/意义]为了改善网络舆论生态,促进社会良性运转,必须首先学会快速精准地区分公众不同的社交媒体使用行为,预测行为结果并及时引导,将网络治理提前到用户使用的初始阶段。[方法/过程]研究基于信息输入与输出视角,借助逻辑推演解析了公众对社交媒体使用的封闭型、极端型、自由型和理想型4种典型状态的内涵与特征,通过案例分析验证了理论的适用性,最后,总结了4种状态的不同社会影响及治理策略,构建起一个研究公众社交媒体使用行为的基本模式框架。[结果/结论]公众社交媒体使用的封闭型状态具有隐匿性,治理重点应放在日常维护,通过创新政民关系的加强方式,冲破封闭圈群的情感壁垒;极端型状态对社会发展的负面冲击最大,治理重点应放在拓宽网络理政的有效渠道,从而提高公众的信息收集质量;自由型状态存在双面效果,治理重点在于建立有序网络参与制度,以约束网民意见表达的过度自由化;理想型状态虽然能够促进社会稳定,但尚待继续完善,可以通过参与型政治文化的建设,从根本上提升公众的政治素养。
[Purpose/Significance]In order to improve the network public opinion ecology and promote the benign operation of society, we must first learn to distinguish the different usage behaviors of social media quickly and accurately, predict and guide behavior results in time, and put the network governance forward to initial stage of using.[Method/Process]Based on the information input and output perspective, this study analysis the connotation and features of the four typical status of social media use which includes closed-type, extreme-type, free-type and ideal-type status, verify the applicability of the theory through the case analysis, summarize the different impacts and the corresponding management strategy of these four status, and build a basic framework of the study on public social media use behavior.[Result/Conclusion]First, the closed practice mode is concealed, the focus of governance should be on daily maintenance. Through the strengthening of the relationship between political and civil relations, the emotional barriers of closed circles are broken. Second, the extreme practice mode has the greatest negative impact on social development, and the focus of governance should be on broadening the effective channels of network governance, thereby improving the quality of public information collection. Third, the free practice mode has a double-sided effect, and the focus of governance is to establish an orderly network participation system to constrain the excessive liberalization of opinion expression. Last, although the ideal practice mode can promote social stability, it still needs to be improved. We can fundamentally enhance the political literacy of the public through the construction of participatory political culture.
[Purpose/Significance]In order to improve the network public opinion ecology and promote the benign operation of society, we must first learn to distinguish the different usage behaviors of social media quickly and accurately, predict and guide behavior results in time, and put the network governance forward to initial stage of using.[Method/Process]Based on the information input and output perspective, this study analysis the connotation and features of the four typical status of social media use which includes closed-type, extreme-type, free-type and ideal-type status, verify the applicability of the theory through the case analysis, summarize the different impacts and the corresponding management strategy of these four status, and build a basic framework of the study on public social media use behavior.[Result/Conclusion]First, the closed practice mode is concealed, the focus of governance should be on daily maintenance. Through the strengthening of the relationship between political and civil relations, the emotional barriers of closed circles are broken. Second, the extreme practice mode has the greatest negative impact on social development, and the focus of governance should be on broadening the effective channels of network governance, thereby improving the quality of public information collection. Third, the free practice mode has a double-sided effect, and the focus of governance is to establish an orderly network participation system to constrain the excessive liberalization of opinion expression. Last, although the ideal practice mode can promote social stability, it still needs to be improved. We can fundamentally enhance the political literacy of the public through the construction of participatory political culture.
引文
[1] 杨振武.把握好政治家办报的时代要求[N].人民日报,2016-03-21.
[2] 戴维·伊斯顿.政治生活的系统分析[M].王浦劬,译.北京:华夏出版社,1999:366.
[3] 刘婵君,李明德.社会化媒体与政治生态研究谱系:内涵诠释、现实表征与关系构想[J].西安交通大学学报(社科版),2015,35(1):95-101.
[4] Shah D V,Kwak N,Holbert R L."Connecting" and "disconnecting" with civic life:patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital [J].Political Communication,2001,18(2):141-162.
[5] 游淳惠,徐煜.互联网使用与政治参与关系的再审视:基于2012年台湾地区TCS数据的实证分析[J].国际新闻界,2015(8):33-46.
[6] 张明新,刘伟.互联网的政治性使用与我国公众的政治信任[J].公共管理学报,2014(1):90-103.
[7] Rebecca Ping Yu.The relationship between passive and active non-political social media use and political expression on Facebook and Twitter [J].Computers in Human Behavior,2016(1):413-420.
[8] Anders Olof Larsson,Bringing it all back home?Social media practices by Swedish municipalities [J].European Journal of Communication,2013,28(6):681-695.
[9] 凯斯·R·桑斯坦.网络共和国——网络社会中的民主问题[M].黄维明译,上海:上海人民出版社,2003:5.
[10] Diana C.Mutz.,The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation[J].American Journal of Political Science,2002,46(4):838-855.
[11] Matthew Barnidge.The role of news in promoting political disagreement on social media[J].Computers in Human Behavior,2015(52):211-218.
[12] Sunstein C.Republic.com 2.0 Princeton[M].New Jersey:Princeton University,2007:9.
[13] Elkim S L.City and regime in the American Republic[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1987:37.
[14] 胡泳.网络政治——当代中国社会与传媒的行动选择[M].北京:国家行政学院出版社,2014:30.
[15] 刘乃强.占中至今我们学到了什么?[EB/OL].[2015-02-26].http://subscribe.mail.10086.cn/subscribe/readAll.do?columnId=37%2C922&itemId=2873137
[16] 马亮.大数据技术何以创新公共治理?——新加坡智慧国案例研究[J].电子政务,2015(5):2-9.
[17] 姚雪青.互联网新观察:加强激励监督逐步完善配套措施[N].人民日报,2018-06-21.
[18] 习近平.在网络安全和信息化工作座谈会上的讲话[EB/OL].[2017-05-06].http://news.xinhuanet.com/newmedia/2016-04/26/c_135312437.htm.
[2] 戴维·伊斯顿.政治生活的系统分析[M].王浦劬,译.北京:华夏出版社,1999:366.
[3] 刘婵君,李明德.社会化媒体与政治生态研究谱系:内涵诠释、现实表征与关系构想[J].西安交通大学学报(社科版),2015,35(1):95-101.
[4] Shah D V,Kwak N,Holbert R L."Connecting" and "disconnecting" with civic life:patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital [J].Political Communication,2001,18(2):141-162.
[5] 游淳惠,徐煜.互联网使用与政治参与关系的再审视:基于2012年台湾地区TCS数据的实证分析[J].国际新闻界,2015(8):33-46.
[6] 张明新,刘伟.互联网的政治性使用与我国公众的政治信任[J].公共管理学报,2014(1):90-103.
[7] Rebecca Ping Yu.The relationship between passive and active non-political social media use and political expression on Facebook and Twitter [J].Computers in Human Behavior,2016(1):413-420.
[8] Anders Olof Larsson,Bringing it all back home?Social media practices by Swedish municipalities [J].European Journal of Communication,2013,28(6):681-695.
[9] 凯斯·R·桑斯坦.网络共和国——网络社会中的民主问题[M].黄维明译,上海:上海人民出版社,2003:5.
[10] Diana C.Mutz.,The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation[J].American Journal of Political Science,2002,46(4):838-855.
[11] Matthew Barnidge.The role of news in promoting political disagreement on social media[J].Computers in Human Behavior,2015(52):211-218.
[12] Sunstein C.Republic.com 2.0 Princeton[M].New Jersey:Princeton University,2007:9.
[13] Elkim S L.City and regime in the American Republic[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1987:37.
[14] 胡泳.网络政治——当代中国社会与传媒的行动选择[M].北京:国家行政学院出版社,2014:30.
[15] 刘乃强.占中至今我们学到了什么?[EB/OL].[2015-02-26].http://subscribe.mail.10086.cn/subscribe/readAll.do?columnId=37%2C922&itemId=2873137
[16] 马亮.大数据技术何以创新公共治理?——新加坡智慧国案例研究[J].电子政务,2015(5):2-9.
[17] 姚雪青.互联网新观察:加强激励监督逐步完善配套措施[N].人民日报,2018-06-21.
[18] 习近平.在网络安全和信息化工作座谈会上的讲话[EB/OL].[2017-05-06].http://news.xinhuanet.com/newmedia/2016-04/26/c_135312437.htm.