摘要
跨文化新闻传播是跨文化传播和国际传播日益交融的产物。相对于后两者比较明确的学科边界以及较长的发展历程,跨文化新闻传播似乎是一个“时髦”的提法。当然,我们也可以把跨文化新闻传播纳入跨文化传播学,成为其下的一个分支。
其实,跨文化新闻传播早已进入我们的视野。在全球化的浪潮中,我们已经习惯了来自不同文化的大众传媒所进行的国际传播。与国际传播本身不同的是,跨文化新闻传播所着重强调的是文化多样性以及主权平等基础上新闻传播的自由和新闻传播秩序的平等。它是一种来自不同文化以及不同国家之间并建立在协商、沟通和理解基础上的新闻传播。在跨文化新闻传播的过程中,由于各种文化和意识形态的差异,出现相互之间的认知冲突和不同的报道框架。结合钓鱼岛事件中传统媒体的报道所呈现出的认知差别和不同的框架差异及在此基础上对差异的诠释,笔者认为,跨文化新闻传播的理想状态还远未实现。跨文化新闻传播的障碍重重体现出来自不同文化的国家间的交流是异常艰难的。这就意味着,跨文化新闻传播已经到了需要我们进行反思的时候了。
从一般意义上来说,我们所提出的跨文化新闻传播主要是指传统媒体,也即印刷媒体、电子媒体,而并不包括网络媒体等新媒体。那么,在传统媒体时代下异常艰难的跨文化新闻传播在进入新媒介时代以后,会有什么样的改变呢?随着媒介技术的飞速发展,媒介化社会已然形成。在技术与社会转型的背景下,新闻产品以及其内容的编制和发行早已脱离了通过单一的媒介而运作的局面。媒介融合的进一步加速为传统媒体与新媒介进行联袂,搭建起哈贝马斯式的网络公共空间,形成自由讨论以及更加多元化的舆论平台提供了可能。公民社会中的普通公民不仅能够通过这种网络舆论平台来关注国内所发生的焦点事件,进行自我赋权,也可以利用这种新型舆论平台去了解国际上的跨文化新闻传播事件,并参与其中的讨论。这似乎给跨文化新闻传播带来了一丝曙光和希望。然而,通过分析研究,笔者认为在新媒介的时代,网络民族主义异军突起。网络民族主义虽然能够唤起民族认同感以及对民族共同体的想象,但由此所引发的狭隘的狂热沙文主义是需要我们警惕的。从某种意义上来说,它阻碍了跨文化新闻传播的交流。
同时,笔者发现,跨文化新闻传播过程中的各个国家在国际热点事件的文化输出上仅存在一个微弱的权力话语的变迁。从各国国际热点事件的报道来看,其主旨仍然在致力于对主流话语的赞颂和吹捧。
虽然在改革开放后,随着市场经济和法制观念的发展,中国开始进入新权威主义时代。其言论虽由之前的“一家之言”向“博采众议”的方向发展,权力话语虽由之前的“官方声音”向“民间舆论”转变,话语权力也在不经意间也由自上而下转变为上下联袂的合意,但可惜,尤其在涉及到政治事件时,我国的党一国意识形态的余热仍然在发挥作用,国家层面的官方话语还是凌驾于公民社会所形成的民间话语之上。所以,我们认为,这种话语变迁和改变以前跨文化新闻传播失衡的趋势依旧微弱。
其实,无论是新媒介还是传统媒体对于国际热点事件的报道,其主流路径仍然是——媒体理所当然的要服务于国家政权,并或明或暗地表达国家和执政党的声音。香港学者邱林川用过一个词叫“扩展了的媒介生态系统”,也就是说这两种媒体形态在实际中不是严格相互孤立的,而是相互渗透的。传统媒体的跨文化新闻传播不一定就是悲观的,而新媒体中的跨文化新闻传播也不一定就能带来希望。我们不能重蹈媒介技术决定论的覆辙。媒体只是再现,它背后的那套运作逻辑不会因媒介形态发生根本的变化。日、美双方的媒体在这一点上的表现可以说与中国是基本一致的。媒体作为整个社会有机系统的一个子系统,必然为整个系统服务。可以看出,这是一种典型的帕森斯式的结构功能主义。媒体及其主要编辑人员根据既有文化价值观和所受到的系统内部的结构压力后对事件进行报道,从而丧失了其应有的主体性,这也是跨文化传播之所以无奈的地方。
然而,面对此种无奈现实,我们并非一筹莫展,并非只能坐以待毙。在完成对钓鱼岛事件中传统媒体的报道议题分析和框架分析、并利用跨文化传播中的面子理论、社会文化因素以及政治传播中的意识形态因素对上述议题以及文本分析之所以出现差异的原因进行阐述,并文章在探究了新媒介时代下跨文化新闻传播的利弊之后,笔者从更为具体的实践层面上,总结了关于跨文化新闻传播的可能路径。也就是,在跨文化语境下形成所谓的跨文化新闻传播理念。不仅仅是记者和编辑人员们要实现全球范围内的新闻专业主义,我们自身作为人类不同文化的一份子都有责任去理解跨文化交流的动态性和多样文化的主体间性,从而更好地服务于跨文化新闻传播。
Cross-cultural news coverage is a blend which is increasingly interacted by cross-cultural communication and international communication. Compared to the latter two discipline which possesses relatively clearer disciplinary boundaries and longer course of its development, cross-cultural news coverage seems to be a "fashionable" reference. We could also deem cross-cultural news coverage as a branch of cross-cultural communication studies.
In fact, we have led cross-cultural news coverage into our vision long long ago. In the wave of globalization, we have become accustomed to the international communication of the mass media from different cultures. Cross-cultural news coverage, which is differ from international communication, emphasis on cultural diversity and the freedom of Journalism and Communication based on the equality of sovereignty and the order of information and communication. It is a news coverage on the basis of consultation, communication and understanding between different cultures as well as different countries. In the process of cross-cultural news coverage, it is very common that a variety of cultural and ideological differences have led to cognitive conflict and different reports framework. With these cognitive differences and different frameworks regards to Diaoyu Island incident presented by traditional media reports and differences of interpretation which based on the former one, I believe, it is still far from achieving the ideal state of cross-cultural news coverage. So many obstacles in cross-cultural news coverage have led to the fact that the exchange between countries from different cultures is exceptionally difficult. This means that it is high time that we need to reflect on this very issue.
Generally speaking, cross-cultural news coverage we have proposed here refers to the traditional media which includes print media, electronic media while at the same time does not include online media and other new media. So, what would happen in the frontier of cross-cultural news coverage when we have entered into the era of new media? With the rapid development of media technology, media community is already taking shape. In the context of technology and social transformation, news products and content creation and distribution has long been out of the situation and now operate through a single but comprehensive medium. Convergence media is further accelerating its pace and thus have provided the possibility of the integration of traditional media and new media, the construction of the public space of the network coming from the theory of Habermas and the formation of the platform on which public opinion could be discussed freely and in a more diversified way. Ergo, Ordinary citizens in civil society not only could focus on the domestic events through such a network platform, which is a process of self-empowerment, but also understand and participate in the discussion of international cross-cultural news events through this new platform. It seems that it has brought a ray of hope to the cross-cultural news coverage. However, with the analysis and research that have been done, I hold the view that in the era of new media, the sudden emergence of the cyber-nationalism is now a new phaenomenon. we need to be alert to the narrow chauvinism though network nationalism could evoke a sense of national identity and the imagination of the national community. In a sense, it hinders the cross-cultural exchange of news dissemination.
At the same time, I found that the cross-cultural news coverage process in various countries only exerts a weak transformation on the power of discourse regarding to the international cultural output of the hot events. And if we take the report of hot international incidents from various countries as examples, it is easy to say that the subject is still committed to the praise to the mainstream discourse.
With the development of market economy and the concept of the rule of law, China has begun to enter the era of neo-authoritarianism since it has initiated the policy of reform and opening up. The remarks of media has shifted from the previous one of "the words belonged to one "to the direction of "distilled from diversified angle". Also, the power of discourse has shifted from the previous "official voice" to the "public opinion". And the power of discourse also inadvertently changed from top to bottom to the combination of the upper and lower. However, it is a pity that, especially when it comes to political events of the party, the national ideology still plays a role in shaping the fact that the official discourse of the national level is still above the civil discourse from the civil society. Therefore, we believe that the trend of discourse changing and eliminating imbalances of the previous cross-cultural news coverage is still ambiguous.
In fact, the fundamental way of the coverage of international hot events from both the new media or traditional media is still based on the old fashion that the media of course should serve the state power, and explicitly or implicitly express the voice of the state or the ruling party. Hong Kong scholar Jack Qiu once used a word "expanded media ecosystem" to describe this situation. It means that the two media forms in practice is not strictly mutually isolated, but mutually penetrated. Cross-cultural news dissemination of traditional media is not necessarily pessimistic, and new media in the cross-cultural journalism and communication may not necessarily be able to bring hope. We can not repeat the mistakes of the media of technological determinism. The media is just merely a reproduction set, which tells us that the operational logic behind the media will not change even if the media forms changed. We then could have the conclusion that the media from Japan, and the U.S. is basically on the same routine with China in the performance of reporting international events. The media as a subsystem of society of the whole organic system is bound to service for the entire system. As can be seen, this is a typical Parsons structural functionalism. Based on both cultural values and the structural pressure from the system, the media and its main editorial staff lost its due subjectivity when covering the incident reports, which is the very reason that why cross-cultural communication is nothing but in helplessness.
However, in the face of such a helpless reality, we are not in vain, not just wait to die. After completing the analysis of traditional media coverage and its framework in the event of the Diaoyu Islands issue, and using of the the face theory of intercultural communication, social and cultural factors, and ideological factors in political communication on the above issues as well as text analysis to describe the result of these differences, and exploring the pros and cons of cross-cultural news coverage in the era of new media, the author summed up the path of the possibility of the coverage of news about cross-cultural from the more specific practical level. That is, the so-called cross-cultural news coverage concept formed in the context of cross-cultural dissemination. Then, we know that, Not just reporters and editors are the people who should achieve journalistic professionalism in worldwide, we, ourselves, as a part of human culture, also has a responsibility to understand the cross-cultural dynamics and the intersubjectivity of cultural diversity in order to better services in cross-cultural journalism and communication.
引文
①Pool, Ithiel de Sola. Technologies of Freedom.1984, Harvard University Press.
②Rheingold, Howard. Smart Mobs.the next social revolution.2002, Basic Books.
①Bardoel,Jo,&Deuze,Mark, (2001). Network Journalism:Converging Competences of Media Professionals and Professionalism. In:Australian Journalism Review 23 (2), pp.91-103.
②David,Domingo.&Ram6n,Salaverria. Four Dimensions of Journalistic Convergence:A preliminary Approach to Current Media Trends at Spain.2006, Paper presented on the 8th International Symposium on Online Journalism.
③Bruce,Garrison.&Michel, Dupagne. A Case Study of Media Convergence at Media General's Tampa News Center. University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, November 6-8,2003. http://com.Miami.Edu/car/lcolumbia03.Pdf.
Bruce,Garrison.&Michel,Dupagne. The Meaning and Influence of Convergence:A qualitative case study of newsroom work at the Tampa News Center. Journalism Studies, Vol.7, No 2,2006.
①蔡雯.媒介融合前景下的新闻传播变革——试论“融合新闻”及其挑战[J].国际新闻界,2006(5)以及蔡雯.试论“融合新闻”的特点与运作[J].新闻战线,2007(1).
②彭兰.从新一代电子报刊看媒介融合走向[J].国际新闻界,2006(7).
③喻国明.微内容的聚合与开发.网络媒体内容生产的技术关键[J].网络传播,2006(10).
④包鹏程.产业融合.出版业面临的机遇与挑战[J].出版发行研究,2009(7).
⑤傅玉辉.大媒体产业.从媒体融合到产业融合——中美电信业和传媒业的关系研究[M].北京.中国广播电视出版社,2008.
⑥周振华.《信息化与产业融合》,上海.上海三联书店，上海人民出版社,2003.
⑦袁志坚.媒介融合趋势下的报业编辑部重构[J].中国编辑,2008(6).
⑧徐锋.“跨区作业”的“融合之战”一《广州日报》奥运报道编辑部前移进发战斗合力[J].今传媒,2008(10).
①匡文波. “新媒介”概念辨析[J].国际新闻界,2008(6).
②彭兰.个性化与社会化.Web2.0时代信息消费的双重旋律[J].国际新闻界,2009(3).
③高钢.谁是未来新闻的报道者——维基技术的本质及对新闻报道的影响[J].国际新闻界,2008(6).
④Sanaz,Fallahkhair. Media convergence:An architecture for iTV and mobile phone based interactive language learning. In:Proceedings of European conference on interactive television:enhancing the experience,31 Mar-02 Apr 04, Brighton, UK.
⑤Wilma,Stassen. Your news in 140 characters:exploring the role of social media in journalism. In:African Edition, Global Media Journal,2010 Vol 4 (1).
①单波.新闻传播学的跨文化转向[M].上海.上海交通大学出版社,2006.
②Harry, Triandis. Culture and Social Behavior. McGraw-Hill Humanities,1994.
③单波.跨文化传播的问题与可能性[M].武汉.武汉大学出版社,2010.
④Kim, Young Yun. Interethnic communication:the context and the behavior, Communication Yearbook,1994.
⑤Berry, J.W. Globalization and acculturation, International Journal of Intercultural Relations 32(2008), pp330-332.
⑥F.W.Rudmin, Field Notes from the Quest for the First Use of Acculturation, Cross-Cultural Psychology Bulletin, vol.37,2003, pp.24-31.
①Redfield,R., Linton,R.,& Herskovits.M.J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist,38,149-152.
②Ting-Toomey, S.,Cross-Culturak Face-Negotiation:An Analytical Overview. Pacific Region Forum Prestented on April 15,1992.
③Rathje,Stefanie. Intercultural Competence:The Status and Future of a Controversial Concept. Language and Intercultural Communication,2007,7(4), pp.254-266.
④单波.新闻传播学的跨文化转向[M].上海.上海交通大学出版社,2006-2007,7(4)：254.单波.跨文化传播的问题与可能性[M].武汉.武汉大学出版社,2010.单波.跨文化传播的文化伦理[J].新闻与传播研究,2005(1).单波.跨文化对话中的叙事[J].学习与实践,2006(2).
①王金会.跨文化传播下的文化融合与文化自觉[J].黑龙江社会科学,2007(2)
②张晓静.跨文化传播中媒介刻板印象分析[J].当代传播,2007(2)
③胡正荣.跨学科视野中的中国跨文化传播研究进程与问题[J].当代传播,2011(3).
④万小广.论跨文化传播的研究路径[J]国际新闻界,2009(5).
⑤刘阳.试论跨文化传播研究的理论建构一以2000-2008年中国跨文化传播研究为背景[J].国际新闻界,2009(5).
⑥姜飞.跨文化传播的后殖民语境[J].新闻与传播研究,第11卷(1).
⑦汪明香.从文化帝国主义到跨文化传播[J].安徽广播电视大学学报,2005(1).
⑧姜飞.跨文化传播的后殖民语境[J].新闻与传播研究,第11卷(1)
⑨秦志希,郭小平.论“风险社会”危机的跨文化传播[J].国际新闻界,2006(3).
⑩夏红卫.文化交流逆差下的跨文化传播典范——中国执教美国第一人戈鲲化的传播学解读[J].厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004(1)
(11月琴.中日跨文化传播的障碍以及超越——以纪录片靖国神社为例[J].新闻与传播研究,16卷(3)
①王琛.中国古代交聘、国家形象与跨文化传播[J].国际新闻界,2008(6).
②潘文年.中国出版业“走出去”.跨国经营的文化风险分析——以跨文化传播为理论视角[J].国际新闻界,2010(9).
③吴斌.后传媒时代电视文化的选择——网络电视传播透视[J].现代传播,2003(4).
①陈静静.跨文化传播的民族主义解读一丰田霸道广告个案研究[J].新闻大学,2004(4)
②罗迪、毛玉西.争论中的“网络民族主义”[EB／LO].http://media.people.com.cn/GB/22114/44110/44111/3278579.html
③李慕瑾.网络民族主义掀开中国民族主义新篇章[N],国际先驱导报,2003-9-23
④刘江永.“网络民族主义”和“对日新思维”不太可取 [EB／LO].http://opinion.people.com.cn/GB/40604/3194741.html
⑤杨奎松.暸望东方周刊访谈.关于网络民族主义问题的讨论 [EB/LO].http://www.yangkuisong.net/xsyj/000224. htm
⑥朱学勤.这一年.基于自由的创造[N].南方周末,2004-12-31.
① Edward, Burnett. Tylor. The origin of Culture, New York:Harper and Row,1958:1.
②单波.跨文化传播的问题与可能性[M].武汉.武汉大学出版社,2010：25.
③ Rudmin, F. W. (2003). Critical History of the Acculturation Psychology of Assimilation, Separation, Integration, and Marginalization, Review of General Psychology,7,3-37.
④姜飞.马克思主义与后殖民批评[M].外国文学研究,2001(2).
①Mody, B. International Communication:Introduction. In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Mody(Eds.),Handbook of international and intercultural conmmunication (2nd ed., pp291-294).2002, Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
① 1972年9月27日周恩来总理与田中角荣首相第三次会谈记录。参见张香山.中日复交谈判回顾[M].日本学刊,1998(1)：47.
② [日]永信利.日中建交谈判纪实[M].时事出版社,1989：201-202.
① Ashcroft, B, Griffiths, Garethl, and Tiffin, H (1999)Key Concepts in Post-Colonial Studies, Routledge: London and New York P73.
②姜飞.试析当前跨文化传播中力量的博弈[M].中国社会科学院研究生院学报,Journal of Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,2007 (05).
③丁建新.批评语言学[M].外语教学与研究出版社,2011：101.
④耿芳.《纽约时报》涉华报道的意识形态倾向——批评话语分析的视角[J].现代传播,2012(7).
⑤单波.跨文化传播的问题与可能性[M].武汉.武汉大学出版社,201O.
①[美]拉斯韦尔.社会传播的结构与功能[M].张国良.20世纪传播学经典文本[M].复旦大学出版社,2003：205.
②[美]拉斯韦尔.社会传播的结构与功能[M].张国良.20世纪传播学经典文本[M].复旦大学出版社,2003：205.
③[荷]托伊恩A迪克.作为话语的新闻[M].曾庆香译,华夏出版社,2003(26).
①顾耀明.我看美国媒体[M].新华出版社,2000：2-3.
①张洪忠.大众传播学的议程设置理论与框架理论关系探讨[M].西南民族学院学报(哲学杜会科学版),2001(10).
②金苗.美国25家日报要闻版伊拉克战争报道新闻构架分析[J].新闻与传播研究.2003(3)：70.
③张洪忠.大众传播学的议程设置理论与框架理论关系探讨[M].《西南民族学院学报》(哲学杜会科学版),200(10).
①臧国仁.新闻媒体与消息来源一媒介框架与真实建构之论述[M].台北：三民书局,1999：110—111.
②Gitlin, T., The whole world is watching:Mass media in the making and unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley, CA:Univesity of California Press.1980.
③Bobo, L. D.& Hutcbings.V. L. (1996). Perceptions of racial group competition:extending Blumer's theory of group position to a multiracial social context, American Sodobgical Review.61(6),951-72.
④Hinkle,S.& Brown,R. (1990). Intergroup comparisons and social identity:some links and lacunae, in Hogg, M.A.and Abrams,D.(eds) Social Identity Theory. Constructive and Critical Advances.49-70.
⑤http://world.people.com.cn/n/2012/0921/c1002-19067158.html
①Cottle, S. (2000). Media Research and Ethnic Minorities:Mapping the Field in Simon Cottle (ed) Ethnic Minorities and the Media Changing Cultural Boundaries. Milton Keynes:Open University Press.
②http://ajw.asahi.com/article/asia/china/AJ201302280058文章翻译为笔者原创,标题及译文中括号内的英文由笔者因分析需要而添加。
①吴瑛.文化对外传播.理论与战略[M].上海：上海交通大学出版社,2009：145.
②VanGorp, B. (2007) The constructionist approach to framing:Bringing culture back in, J. of Communication,57:60-78.
①罗以澄.对中日传媒关于两国报道的文化思考[J].国际新闻界.2005(5).
②本段内容总结于吕新雨的两篇文章,并对其结论有一定的引申。文章详见.吕新雨.新乡土主义,还是城市贫民窟?开放时代,Open Times,2010年04期。吕新雨. “亚细亚专制主义”与20世纪的中、苏(俄)革命与道路之辩——兼论秦晖先生的“雅典(罗马)道路”说[J]. Open Times.2012(1).
①Goffman, E., The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Gardon city, NY:Doubleday,1959, p.105
①Ting-Toomey, S.,Cross-Culturak Face-Negotiation:An Analytical Overview. Pacific Region Forum Prestented on April 15,1992.
②单波.跨文化传播的问题与可能性[M].武汉.武汉大学出版社,2010：59-60.
③Ting-Toomey, S. Intercultural conflict styles:A facework negotiation-theory. Theories in Intercultural Communication. Newbury Park, CA:Sage.1988.
④Ting-Toomey, S. Intercultural conflict styles:A facework negotiation-theory. Theories in Intercultural Communication. Newbury Park, CA:Sage.1988.
①单波.跨文化传播的问题与可能性[M].武汉.武汉大学出版社,2010：231.
①姜飞.跨文化传播的后殖民语境[M].新闻与传播研究.2004(1).
①http://yuqing.people.com.cn/n/2013/0116/c212785-20222255.html
①吴玫.测定非正式公众领域.中国互联网政治论坛量化分析[M].杜骏飞.中国网络传播研究(第二卷第一辑).杭州.浙江大学出版社,2008：3-35.
②关于是否有真实民意存在的讨论可参见孙玮《以大众的名义——当前大众传媒的文化民粹主义倾向分析》,文中说“崔永元面对大众传媒‘你不怕站到人民对立面’的提问,反驳说,人民不总是正确的。并进一步引申.‘我从来就没有在意人民的概念,哪有人民呀,没有人民呀,只有甲乙丙丁,张三、李四这些具体的个体,我希望了解他们的喜怒哀乐。””笔者总结孙玮的话说,民意是大众传媒的借口。具体详见,孙玮.以大众的名义——当前大众传媒的文化民粹主义倾向分析[J].新闻大学.2006(3).
③http://bbs.tianya.cn/post-worldlook-550571一1.shtml.
①Judith N. Martin, Thomas K. Nakayama. Experiencing Intercultural Communication[M]. Mayfield Publishing Company,2001.
② 林惠祥.文化人类学[M].北京：商务印书馆,1991.
③ 王军.试析当代中国的网络民族主义[J].世界经济与政治,2006(2)
①王军.试析当代中国的网络民族主义[J].世界经济与政治,2006(2).
②http://s.weibo.com/weibo/%25E9%2592%2593%25E9%25B1%25BC%25E5%25B2%259B&xsort=hot&page= 1#1334190949203
①郭镇之.网络舆论与中国形象.对《纽约时报》一篇报道及其网上评论的个案分析[J].新闻与传播评论.2009(1).
①Berry, J.W. Globalization and acculturation, International Journal of Intercultural Relations 32(2008), pp330-332.
②引用自李希光在全球创意领袖峰会上的谈话。详见http://ww.media.tsinghua.edu.cn/2009/0928/414.html.
③芮必峰.描述乎?规范乎?新闻专业主义之于我国新闻传播实践[J].新闻与传播研究.2010(1).
④陆哗,潘忠党.成名的想象.中国社会转型过程中新闻从业者的专业主义[J].台湾.新闻学研究,2002(71).
⑤芮必峰.描述乎?规范乎?新闻专业主义之于我国新闻传播实践[J].新闻与传播研究.2010(1).
①Glaser,B.G,& Strauss,A.L.(1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Chicago:Aldine Pub. Co.
②Henwood.K.,& Pidgeon,N.(2003). Grounded theory in psychological research. In P.M.Camic & J.E.Rhodes(Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology:Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp.131-155). Washington, DC, USA:American Psychology Association.
③Charmaz,K.(2002). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J.Gubrium & J.A.Holstein(Eds.), Handbook of interview research:Context and method (pp.675-693).Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
①Henwood, K.& Pidgeon, N. (2003). Grounded theory in psychological research. In P.M.Camic & J.E.Rhodes(Eds.). Qualitative research in psychology:Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp.131-155). Washington, DC, USA:American Psychology Association.
②American Psychological Association.(2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist,57,1060-1073.
[1]【法】皮埃尔·布尔迪厄.关于电视[M].许钧译,沈阳.辽宁教育出版社,2000.
[2]【加】马歇尔·麦克卢汉.理解媒介——论人的延伸[M].北京.商务印书馆,2000.
[3]【美】拉斯韦尔.社会传播的结构与功能[M].张国良主编.20世纪传播学经典文本[M].复旦大学出版社,2003：205.
[4][美】拉里·萨默瓦,理查德·波特.跨文化传播[M].闵惠泉等译,北京.中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[5]【美】彼得斯.交流的无奈.传播思想史[M].何道宽译,北京.华夏出版社,2003.
[6]【美】爱德华·霍尔.沉默的语言[M].刘建荣译,上海.上海人民出版社,1991.
[7]【美】爱德华·霍尔.超越文化[M].居延安译,上海.上海文化出版社,1988.
[8]【英】斯图尔特·霍尔.表征.文化表现与意指实践[M].徐亮,陆兴华译,北京.商务印书馆,2003.
[9]【荷】托伊恩·迪克.作为话语的新闻[M].曾庆香译,华夏出版社,2003：26.
[10]【日】永信利.日中建交谈判纪实》[M].时事出版社,1989.
[11]【美】拉里A萨姆瓦等著.陈南等译.跨文化传通[M].三联书店出版,1988：3.
[12]包鹏程.比较新闻传播学导论[M].合肥.安徽大学出版社,2004.
[13]陈向明.质的研究方法和社会科学研究[M].北京.中国社会科学出版社,2004.
[14]仇立平.社会研究方法[M].重庆.重庆大学出版社,2008.
[15]傅玉辉.大媒体产业.从媒体融合到产业融合——中美电信业和传媒业的关系研究[M].北京.中国广播电视出版社,2008.
[16]单波.新闻传播学的跨文化转向[M].上海.上海交通大学出版社,2006.
[17]单波.跨文化传播的问题与可能性[M].武汉.武汉大学出版社,2010.
[18]周振华.信息化与产业融合[M].上海.上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2003.
[19]林惠祥.文化人类学[M].北京：商务印书馆,1991.
[20]刘林利.日本大众媒介中的中国形象[M].北京：中国传媒大学出版社,2007.
[21]刘继南.国际传播与国家形象[M].北京：北京广播学院出版社,2003.
[22]赵晶晶.欧美传播与非欧美传播中心的建立[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2009.
[23]吴光辉.日本的中国形象[M].北京：人民出版社,2010.
[24]单波.跨文化传播新论[M].武汉：武汉大学,2005.
[25]吴瑛.文化对外传播.理论与战略[M].上海：上海交通大学出版社,2009.
[26]顾耀明.我看美国媒体[M].北京：新华出版社,2000.
[27]Harry, Triandis. Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO:Westview Press, 1995.
[28]Harry, Triandis. Culture and Social Behavior. McGraw-Hill Humanities,1994.
[29]Gudykunst, W.B.&Kim, Y.Y. Communicating with strangers:An approach to intercultural communication (3rd ed.). New York:McGraw-Hill,1997.
[30]Kim, Young Yun. Interethnic communication:the context and the behavior, Communication Yearbook,1994.
[31]Pool, Ithiel de Sola. Technologies of Freedom.1984, Harvard University Press.
[32]Rheingold, Howard. Smart Mobs.the next social revolution.2002, Basic Books.
[1]蔡雯.媒介融合前景下的新闻传播变革——试论“融合新闻”及其挑战[J].国际新闻界,2006(5).
[2]蔡雯.试论“融合新闻”的特点与运作[J].新闻战线,2007(1).
[3]蔡雯.媒介融合趋势下如何实现内容重整与报道创新——再论“融合新闻”及其实施策略[J].新闻战线,2007(8).
[4]彭兰.从新一代电子报刊看媒介融合走向[J].国际新闻界,2006(7).
[5]喻国明.微内容的聚合与开发.网络媒体内容生产的技术关键[J].网络传播,2006(10).
[6]包鹏程.产业融合.出版业面临的机遇与挑战[J].出版发行研究,2009(7).
[7]袁志坚.媒介融合趋势下的报业编辑部重构[J].中国编辑,2008(6).
[8]徐锋.“跨区作业”的“融合之战”--《广州日报》奥运报道编辑部前移进发战斗合力[J].今传媒,2008(10).
[9]单波,薛晓峰.西方跨文化传播研究中的和谐理念[J].国外社会科学,2008(6).
[10]陈嫌如.跨文化传播原理在我国对外宣传中的运用[J].现代传播,2007(1).
[11]单波.浅析跨文化新闻传播[J].湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003(2).
[12]陈卫星.跨文化传播的全球化背景[J].国际新闻界,2001(2).
[13]单波,王金礼.跨文化传播的文化伦理[J].新闻与传播研究,2005(1).
[14]单波.跨文化传播的文化伦理[J].新闻与传播研究,2005(1).
[15]单波,谢立文.跨文化对话中的叙事[J].学习与实践,2006(2).
[16]潘文年.中国出版业“走出去”.跨国经营的文化风险分析——以跨文化传播为理论视角[J].国际新闻界,2010(9).
[17]王琛.中国古代交聘、国家形象与跨文化传播[J].国际新闻界,2008(6).
[18]黄月琴.中日跨文化传播的障碍以及超越——以纪录片靖国神社为例[J].新闻与传播研究,16(3).
[19]李展.因特网上的跨文化传播[J].厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),1999(1).
[20]夏红卫.文化交流逆差下的跨文化传播典范——中国执教美国第一人戈鲲化的传播学解读[J].厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004(1).
[21]彭兰.网络与跨文化传播初探[J].国际新闻界,2000(6).
[22]常燕荣.论跨文化传播的三种模式[J].湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2003(5).
[23]汪明香.从文化帝国主义到跨文化传播[J].安徽广播电视大学学报,2005(1).
[24]姜飞.跨文化传播的后殖民语境[J].新闻与传播研究,第11卷(1)
[25]陈静静,孙斌华.跨文化传播的民族主义解读一丰田霸道广告个案研究[J].新闻大学,2004(4).
[26]王金会.跨文化传播下的文化融合与文化自觉[J].黑龙江社会科学,2007(2).
[27]胡正荣.跨学科视野中的中国跨文化传播研究进程与问题[J].当代传播,2011(3).
[28]秦志希,郭小平.论“风险社会”危机的跨文化传播[J].国际新闻界,2006(3).
[29]张晓静.跨文化传播中媒介刻板印象分析[J].当代传播,2007(2).
[30]万小广.论跨文化传播的研究路径[J].国际新闻界,2009(5).
[31]刘阳.试论跨文化传播研究的理论建构—以2000-2008年中国跨文化传播研究为背景[J].国际新闻界,2009(5).
[32]姜飞.试析当前跨文化传播中力量的博弈[J].中国社会科学院研究生院学报2007(9).
[33]姜飞.试析跨文化传播中的几个基本问题——兼与童兵先生商榷[J].新闻大学,2006(1).
[34]吴斌.后传媒时代电视文化的选择——网络电视传播透视[J].现代传播,2003(4).
[35]朱学勤.这一年.基于自由的创造[N].南方周末,2004-12-31；
[36]单波.跨文化传播研究的心理学路径[J].湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008(3).
[37]贺承.“抵张”背后的网络民族主义[J].凤凰周刊,2004(19).
[38]刘江永.“网络民族主义”和“对日新思维”不太可取[EB/OL]http://opinion.people.com.cn/GB/40604/3194741.html
[39]杨奎松.瞭望东方周刊访谈.关于网络民族主义问题的讨论[EB/OL]http://www.yangkuisong.net/xsyj/000224.htm
[40]李慕瑾.网络民族主义掀开中国民族主义新篇章[N].国际先驱导报,2003-9-23.
[41]罗迪、毛玉西.争论中的“网络民族主义” [EB/OL]http://media.people.com.cn/GB/22114/44110/44111/3278579.html
[42]张剑荆.草根民主还是民族主义?[J].中国崛起,2005-10-11.
[43]鲁义.中日关系现状与两国媒体的作用[J].日本研究,2006(1).
[44]关世杰.谈传播学的分支—跨文化交流学[J].新闻与传播研究,1996(1).
[45]匡文波.“新媒介”概念辨析[J].国际新闻界,2008(6)：66-69.
[46]彭兰.个性化与社会化.Web2.0时代信息消费的双重旋律[J].国际新闻界,2009(3).
[47]高钢.谁是未来新闻的报道者——维基技术的本质及对新闻报道的影响[J].国际新闻界,2008(6).
[48]金苗、熊永新.美国25家日报要闻版伊拉克战争报道新闻构架分析[J],新闻与传播研究,2003(3)：70.
[49]张洪忠.大众传播学的议程设置理论与框架理论关系探讨[M].西南民族学院学报,2010(10).
[50]臧国仁.新闻媒体与消息来源一媒介框架与真实建构之论述[M].台北：三民书局,1999：110—111.
[51]吴玫.测定非正式公众领域.中国互联网政治论坛量化分析[M].杜骏飞.中国网络传播研究(第二卷第一辑).杭州.浙江大学出版社,2008：3-35.
[52]王军.试析当代中国的网络民族主义[J].世界经济与政治,2006(2).
[53]郭镇之.网络舆论与中国形象.对《纽约时报》一篇报道及其网上评论的个案分析[J].新闻与传播评论.2009(1).
[54]芮必峰.描述乎?规范乎?新闻专业主义之于我国新闻传播实践[J].新闻与传播研究.2010(1).
[55]陆哗,潘忠党.成名的想象.中国社会转型过程中新闻从业者的专业主义[J].台湾.新闻学研究,2002(71).
[56]吕新雨.新乡土主义,还是城市贫民窟?开放时代,Open Times,2010(4).
[57]吕新雨.“亚细亚专制主义”与20世纪的中、苏(俄)革命与道路之辩——兼论秦晖先生的“雅典(罗马)道路”说,Open Times,2012(1).
[58]张蓉.浅议日本媒体的议程设置与话语霸权[J].新闻大学,2005年秋季号.
[59]张香山.中日复交谈判回顾[J].日本学刊,1998(1)：47.
[60]丁建新、廖益清主编.批评语言学[J].外语教学与研究出版社,2011：101.
[61]耿芳,《纽约时报》涉华报道的意识形态倾向——批评话语分析的视角[J].现代传播,2012(7).
[62]罗以澄、司景鑫.对中日传媒关于两国报道的文化思考[J].国际新闻界,2005(5).
[63]李双龙、张国良.传媒报道与中日相互形象的形成[J].新闻记者》,2002(12).
[64]蒋一鸣.日本报纸涉华报道现状透视[J].国际新闻界,2005(10).
[65]Charmaz,K.(2002). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J.Gubrium & J.A.Holstein(Eds.), Handbook of interview research:Context and method (pp.675-693).Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
[66]Mody, B. International Communication:Introduction. In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Mody(Eds.),Handbook of international and intercultural conmmunication (2nd ed., pp291-294).2002, Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
[67]Bardoel,Jo,&Deuze,Mark, (2001). Network Journalism:Converging Competences of Media Professionals and Professionalism. In:Australian Journalism Review 23 (2), pp.91-103.
[68]David,Domingo.&Ram6n,Salaverr i a. Four Dimensions of Journalistic Convergence:A preliminary Approach to Current Media Trends at Spain.2006, Paper presented on the 8th International Symposium on Online Journalism. http://online.journalism.utexas.edu/2007/papers/Domingo.pdf.
[69]Bruce,Garrison.&Michel, Dupagne. A Case Study of Media Convergence at Media General's Tampa News Center. University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, November 6-8,2003. http://com.Miami.Edu/car/lcolumbia03.Pdf.
[70]Bruce,Garrison.&Michel,Dupagne. The Meaning and Influence of Convergence:A qualitative case study of newsroom work at the Tampa News Center. Journalism Studies, Vol.7, No 2,2006.
[71]Sanaz,Fallahkhair. Media convergence:An architecture for iTV and mobile phone based interactive language learning. In:Proceedings of European conference on interactive television:enhancing the experience,31 Mar-02 Apr 04, Brighton, UK.
[72]Wilma,Stassen. Your news in 140 characters:exploring the role of social media in journalism. In:African Edition, Global Media Journal,2010 Vol 4 (1).
[73]Rathje,Stefanie. Intercultural Competence:The Status and Future of a Controversial Concept. Language and Intercultural Communication,2007,7(4), pp.254-266
[74]Reuters(edited by CNN). Negroponte:Internet Is Way to World Peace. CNN Interactive,November 25,1997. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9711/25/internet.peace.reut/
[75]Gudykunst, W.B. Uncertainty and anxiety, In Gudykunst, W.B.&Kim, Y.Y.(eds.), Theories in Intercultural Communication (pp213-234). Newbury Park, CA:Sage. 1988.
[76]Gudykunst, W.B. Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory:Current Status, in Intercultural Communication Theory, R.L. Wiseman(ed.), Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif,1995.
[77]Berry, J.W. Globalization and acculturation, International Journal of Intercultural Relations 32(2008), pp330-332.
[78]Ting-Toomey, S. Intercultural conflict styles:A facework negotiation-theory. Theories in Intercultural Communication. Newbury Park, CA:Sage.1988.
[79]Jennifer Thom-Santelli, David R.Millen. I Rogers Street. Organiational Acculturation and Social Networking. IBM T.J Watson Research. CSCW2011, Mach 19-23,2011, Hangzhou, China. Copyright2011ACM978-1-4503-0556-3/11/03.
[80]F.W.Rudmin, Field Notes from the Quest for the First Use of Acculturation, Cross-Cultural Psychology Bulletin, vol.37,2003, pp.24-31.
[81]D.J.Sam, J.W.Berry, The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2006, p.11.
[82]Redfield,R., Linton,R.,& Herskovits,M.J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist,38,149-152.
[83]Ashcroft, B, Griffiths, Garethl, and Tiffin, H (1999)Key Concepts in Post-Colonial Studies, Routledge:London and New York P73.
[84]Baike.so.com/doc/4475825.html 2013-04-13
[85]http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-85531-1-1.html or http://www.ltaaa.com/wtfy/5700.html
[86]Gitlin, T., The whole world is watching:Mass media in the making and unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley, CA:Univesity of California Press.1980.
[87]VanGorp, B. (2007) The constructionist approach to framing:Bringing culture back in, J. of Communication,57:60-78.
[88]Goffman, E., The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Gardon city, NY:Doubleday,1959, p.105
[89]Ting-Toomey, S.,Cross-Culturak Face-Negotiation:An Analytical Overview. Pacific Region Forum Prestented on April 15,1992.
[90]http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/22/world/asia/dispute-over-islands-reflect-jap anese-fear-of-chinas-rise.html? r=1&ref=asia
[91]http://yuqing.people.com.cn/n/2013/0116/c212785-20222255.html
[92]http://bbs.tianya.cn/post-worldlook-550571-1.shtml http://bbs.tianya.cn/post-worldlook-550571-1.shtml
[93]Judith N. Martin, Thomas K. Nakayama. Experiencing Intercultural Communication[M]. Mayfield Publishing Company,2001.
[94]http://s.weibo.com/weibo/%25E9%2592%2593%25E9%25B1%25BC%25E5% 25B2%259B&xsort=hot&page=1#1334190949203
[95]Berry, J.W. Globalization and acculturation, International Journal of Intercultural Relations 32(2008), pp330-332.
[96]Glaser,B.G,& Strauss,A.L.(1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Chicago:Aldine Pub. Co.
[97]Henwood,K.,& Pidgeon,N.(2003). Grounded theory in psychological research. In P.M.Camic & J.E.Rhodes(Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology:Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp.131-155). Washington, DC, USA:American Psychology Association.