影響民衆對政府管制假新聞態度因素之研究

A Study on the Factors Affecting People's Attitudes towards the Government's Regulation of Fake News

10.6683/TPSR.202112_25(2).0001

劉嘉薇(Jia-Wei Liu)

假新聞 ； 假訊息 ； 言論自由 ； 政府管制 ； 第三人效果 ； Fake News ； Disinformation ； Freedom of Speech ； Regulation ； Third-Person Effect

台灣政治學刊

25卷2期（2021 / 12 / 01）

1 - 67

繁體中文

自2016年美國總統大選，假新聞蔚為話題，打擊假新聞的迫切性成了共識。在假新聞盛行的年代，我國民眾認為假新聞該不該管制呢？本研究發現，高達八成五的民眾同意政府管制假新聞。其中明顯會影響民眾認為假新聞需不需要管制的是「第三人效果」，亦即認為假新聞的流傳會影響「其他」民眾對公共事務的判斷，所以需要政府管制假新聞，但認為假新聞的流傳會影響「自己」對公共事務判斷的民眾，反而不會支持政府管制假新聞，這是典型的第三人效果。然而，政府是不是應該管制假新聞呢？從本研究發現，政黨認同是影響民眾此一態度的重要因素，可見政府是否管制假新聞此一議題仍有政治色彩，非純粹第三人效果的影響，且已經有七成六的民眾認為「政府為了規避責任，會將對政府不利的消息，說成是假消息」。建議政府審慎應對，即使立法管制假新聞，也應考慮管制程度，不宜違反言論自由。

Since the 2016 US presidential election, fake news has become a topic, and a consensus on the urgency of cracking down on such news has now been reached. In this age of fake news, do people consider that fake news should be regulated? This study found that 85% of people agreed with the government's regulation of fake news. Among them, the Third-person effect obviously affected the public's belief that fake news needs to be regulated, by which was meant that the spread of fake news would affect the judgment of ＂other＂ citizens on public affairs. For this reason, people hoped that the government would regulate the fake news, but considered that the spread of fake news would affect ＂self＂ judgments on public affairs and would not support the regulation of fake news. This was a typical Third-person effect. However, should the government regulate fake news? From this study, it was found that party identification is an important factor that affects people's perceptions in terms of the regulation of fake news. Therefore, the government's regulation of fake news is still political and not a purely third-person effect. The results showed that 76% of people believed that ＂In order to avoid liability, the government will treat the news that is bad for the government as false news.＂ It is thus recommended that the government respond cautiously, and if the government does regulate fake news, the degree of regulation should also be considered. It is not appropriate to violate freedom of speech.

1. 王泰俐, Tai-li(2019)。假新聞與民主危機。臺灣民主季刊，16(3)，155-161。
   連結：
2. 何吉森, Jason C.S.(2018)。假新聞之監理與治理探討。傳播研究與實踐，8(2)，1-41。
   連結：
3. 沈伯洋, Puma(2021)。中國認知領域作戰模型初探：以 2020 臺灣選舉為例。遠景基金會季刊，22(1)，1-66。
   連結：
4. 俞振華, Eric Chen-hua,林啟耀, Kah-yew(2013)。解析台灣民眾統獨偏好：一個兩難又不確定的選擇。台灣政治學刊，17(2)，165-230。
   連結：
5. 陳佳宜, Chia-yi,王嵩音, Song-in(2009)。第三人效果與父母介入子女電視收視行為。新聞學研究，101，279-310。
   連結：
6. 陳陸輝, Lu-huei(2003)。政治信任、施政表現與民眾對臺灣民主的展望。台灣政治學刊，7(2)，149-188。
   連結：
7. 傅文成, Wen-cheng,陶聖屏, Sheng-ping(2018)。以大數據觀點探索網路謠言的「網路模因」傳播模式。中華傳播學刊，33，99-135。
   連結：
8. 劉靜怡, Ching-yi(2009)。台灣民主轉型的“人權保障”未竟志業－“言論自由”和“集會遊行自由”往何處去。臺灣民主季刊，6(3)，1-46。
   連結：
9. 鄭元皓, Yuan-hao,顧以謙, Yi-chien,吳永達, Yung-da(2020)。殭屍入侵臺灣──探討臉書假帳號與假訊息之現況與未來。刑事政策與犯罪防治研究，26，65-123。
   連結：
10. 羅世宏, Shih-hung(2018)。關於「假新聞」的批判思考：老問題、新挑戰與可能的多重解方。資訊社會研究，35，51-86。
    連結：
11. 自由時報，2019，〈假新聞滿天飛蘇貞昌怒批 NCC「誰都管不到也什麼都不管」〉，https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/breakingnews/2730085，查閱時間：2021/10/17。Liberal Times. 2019. “Jia xinwen man tian fei Su Zhen Chang nupi NCC ‘shei dou guanbudao ye shenme dou buguan’” [Fake News is Going around Tseng-chang, Su Criticized Madly that NCC Can’t Control Anyone and Also Don’t Care Anything]. (Accessed on October 17, 2021).
12. 臺灣傳播調查資料庫，2019，〈第二期第三次（2019）：媒體使用的個人功效與影響 II〉， https://www.crctaiwan.nctu.edu.tw/AnnualSurvey.asp，查閱時間：2021/10/24。Taiwan Communication Survey. 2019. “Meiti shiyong de geren gongxiao yu yingxiang” [The Second Term, The Third Time (2019) The Utility and Impacts of Media Use II]. (Accessed on October 24, 2021).
13. Alemanno, Alberto(2018).Editorial: How to Counter Fake News? A Taxonomy of Anti-fake News Approaches.European Journal of Risk Regulation,9(special issue 1),1-5.
14. Allcott, Hunt,Gentzkow, Matthew(2017).Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election.Journal of Economic Perspectives,31(2),211-236.
15. Ananny, Mike,Crawford, Kate(2018).Seeing without Knowing: Limitations of the Transparency Ideal and Its Application to Algorithmic Accountability.New Media & Society,20(3),973.
16. Anderson, Simon P.(ed.),Waldfogel, Joel(ed.),Strömberg, David(ed.)(2016).Handbook of Media Economics.Amsterdam, NL:Elsevier/NorthHolland Publishing Co..
17. Atwood, L. Erwin(1994).Illusions of Media Power: The Thirdperson Effect.Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,71(2),269-281.
18. Chen, Gina Masullo,Ng, Yee Man Margaret(2016).Third-person Perception of Online Comments: Civil Ones Persuade You More than Me.Computers in Human Behavior,55(Part B),736-742.
19. Cheng, Yang,Chen, Zifei Fay(2020).The Influence of Presumed Fake News Influence: Examining Public Support for Corporate Corrective Response, Media Literacy Interventions, and Governmental Regulation.Mass Communication & Society,23(5),705-729.
20. Chun, Russell(ed.),Drucker, Susan J.(ed.)(2020).Fake News: Real Issues in Modern Communication.New York, NY:Peter Lang Inc..
21. Chung, Myojung,Munno, Greg J.,Moritz, Brian(2015).Triggering Participation: Exploring the Effects of Thirdperson and Hostile Media Perceptions on Online Participation.Computers in Human Behavior,53,452-461.
22. Cinelli, Matteo,De Francisci Morales, Gianmarco,Galeazzi, Alessandro,Quattrociocchi, Walter,Starnini, Michele(2021).The Echo Chamber Effect on Social Media.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,118(9),1-8.
23. Cohen, Jeremy,Mutz, Diana,Price, Vincent,Gunther, Albert(1988).Perceived Impact of Defamation: an Experiment on Third-person Effects.Public Opinion Quarterly,52(2),161-173.
24. Davison, W. Phillips(1983).The Third-person Effect in Communication.Public Opinion Quarterly,47(1),1-15.
25. Duck, Julie M.,Hogg, Michael A.,Terry, Deborah J.(1998).Perceived Self-other Differences in Persuasibility: The Effects of Interpersonal and Group-based Similarity.European Journal of Social Psychology,28(1),1-21.
26. eMORE. 2017. “An Overview on Hate Crime and Hate Speech in 9 EU Countries: towards a Common Approach to Prevent and Tackle Hatred.” https://www.rissc.it/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/AN_OVERVIEW_ON_HATE_CRIME_AND_HATE_SPEEC.pdf (April 9, 2021).
27. European Commission(2018).,未出版
28. Fiss, Owen M.(1996).The Irony of Free Speech.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
29. Gardikiotis, Antonis(2008).Group Distinctiveness, Political Identification, and the Third-person Effect: Perceptions of a Political Campaign in the 2004 Greek National Election.Media Psychology,11(3),331-353.
30. Gunther, Albert C.,Mundy, Paul(1993).Biased Optimism and the Third-person Effect.Journalism & Mass Quarterly,70(1),58-67.
31. Jang, S. Mo,Kim, Joon Kyoung(2018).Third Person Effects of Fake News: Fake News Regulation and Media Literacy Interventions.Computers in Human Behavior,80,295-302.
32. Kenski, Kate(ed.),Jamieson, Kathleen Hall(ed.)(2017).The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
33. Laurent, Gilles,Kapferer, Jean-Noël(1985).Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles.Journal of Marketing Research,22(1),41-53.
34. Lazer, David,Baum, Matthew,Grinberg, Nir,Friedland, Lisa,Joseph, Kenneth,Hobbs, Will,Mattsson, Carolina(2017).,未出版
35. Lim, Joon Soo(2017).The Third-Person Effect of Online Advertising of Cosmetic Surgery: A Path Model for Predicting Restrictive versus Corrective Actions.Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,94(4),972-993.
36. Lovejoy, Jennette,Cheng, Hong,Riffe, Daniel(2010).Voters’ Attention, Perceived Effects, and Voting Preferences: Negative Political Advertising in the 2006 Ohio Governor’s Election.Mass Communication & Society,13(5),487-511.
37. Pariser, Eli(2012).The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You.London, UK:Penguin Books.
38. Park, Wilton(2017).,未出版
39. Peiser, Wolfram,Peter, Jochen(2000).Third-person Perception of Television-Viewing Behavior.Journal of Communication,50(1),25-45.
40. Rabban, David M.(1999).Free Speech in its Forgotten Years, 1870-1920.New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
41. Salwen, Michael B.,Driscoll, Paul D.(1997).Consequences of Third-Person Perception in Support of Press Restrictions in the O.J. Simpson Trial.Journal of Communication,47(2),60-78.
42. Salwen, Michael B.,Dupagne, Michel(1999).The Third-person Effect: Perceptions of the Media’s Influence and Immoral Consequences.Communication Research,26(5),523-549.
43. Santuraki, Suleiman Usman(2019).Trends in the Regulation of Hate Speech and Fake News: A Threat to Free Speech?.Hasanuddin Law Review,5(2),140-158.
44. Sun, Ye,Pan, Zhongdang,Shen, Lijiang(2008).Understanding the Third-person Perception: Evidence from a Meta-analysis.Journal of Communication,58(2),280-300.
45. Toronto, William D.(2018).Fake News and Kill-Switches: The U.S. Government’s Fight to Respond to and Prevent Fake News.Air Force Law Review,79,167-206.
46. Tsesis, Alexander(2015).Free Speech Constitutionalism.University of Illinois Law Review,3(1),1015-1068.
47. Wardle, Claire,Derekshan, Hossein(2017).,未出版
48. Wei, Ran,Chia, Stella C.,Lo, Ven-hwei(2011).Third-person Effect and Hostile Media Perception Influences on Voter Attitudes toward Polls in the 2008 US Presidential Election.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,23(2),169-190.
49. Wei, Ran,Lo, Ven-hwei,Lu, Hung-yi,Hou, Hsin-ya(2015).Examining Multiple Behavioral Effects of Third-person Perception: Evidence from the News about Fukushima Nuclear Crisis in Taiwan.Chinese Journal of Communication,8(1),95-111.
50. Wilkinson, James Harvie, III(2012).Cosmic Constitutional Theory: Why Americans are Losing their Inalienable Right to Selfgovernance.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
51. Xu, Jie,Gonzenbach, William J.(2008).Does a Perceptual Discrepancy Lead to Action? A Meta-analysis of the Behavioral Component of the Third-person Effect.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,20(3),375-385.
52. Yang, Fan,Horning, Michael(2020).Reluctant to Share: How Third Person Perceptions of Fake News Discourage News Readers From Sharing "Real News" on Social Media.Social Media + Society,6(3),1-11.
53. Zuckerman, Alan S.(ed.)(2005).The Social Logic of Politics.Philadelphia, PA:Temple University Press.
54. 行政院，2018，〈防制假訊息危害因應作為〉，https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/448DE008087A1971/c38a3843-aaf7-45ddaa4a-91f913c91559，查閱時間：2019/11/19。Executive Yuan. 2018. “Fangzhi jia xunxi weihai yinying zuowei”[Response and Action to Avoid the Harm of Misinformation]. (Accessed on November 19, 2019).
55. 李秉芳，2018，〈日本媒體調查「關西機場」事件，指臺灣面臨「假新聞危機」〉，https://www.thenewslens.com/article/105576，查閱時間：2019/11/19。Li, Ping-fang. 2018. “Riben meiti diaocha ‘guanxi jichang’ shijian, zhi Taiwan mianlin ‘jia xinwen weiji’” [The Japanese Media Investigated “Kansai International Airport” Incident, and Pointed out that Taiwan is Faced with “The Crisis of Fake News”]. (Accessed on November 1, 2021).
56. 洪永泰, Yung-tai(2001).戶中選樣之研究.臺北=Taipei:五南=Wu-nan Book Inc..
57. 胡元輝，2018b，〈胡元輝：總統要打假訊息歐盟模式值借鑑〉，https://tw.appledaily.com/new/realtime/20181011/1445269/，查閱時間：2019/11/19。Hu, Yuan-hui. 2018b. “Hu Yuan-hui: zongtong yao da jia xunxi oumeng moshi zhi jiejian” [Yuan-hui, Hu: The President Wants to Beat Misinformation, EU-Style is Worth Referring to]. (Accessed on November 19, 2019).
58. 胡元輝, Yuan-hui(2018)。以大數據方法檢索中共假新聞對我國之影響—以M503航線爭議為例與談稿。2018 年三戰策略諮詢會議，臺北=Taipei:
59. 胡光夏, Guang-shiash(2018)。以大數據方法檢索中共假新聞對我國之影響—以M503航線爭議為例與談稿。三戰策略諮詢會議，臺北=Taipei:
60. 孫宇青，2018，〈「劍橋分析」暗黑手段干擾各國選舉〉，https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/world/paper/1185703?utm_medium=M&utm_campaign=SHARE&utm_source=LINE，查閱時間：2019/11/17。Sun, Yu-ching. 2018. “‘Jianqiao fenxi’ anhei shouduan ganrao geguo xuanju” [The Sneaky Means from “Cambridge Analytica” Interfered with The Elections of Each Country]. (Accessed on November 17, 2019).
61. 陳洧農，2021，〈羅秉成×蘇正平×劉昌德｜「打假」的臺灣模式如何可能？如何延續？〉，https://www.feja.org.tw/59632?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=FEJA，查閱時間：2021/06/11。Chen, Wei-nong. 2021. “Luo Ping-cheng × Su Tzen-ping × Liu Changde∣‘Dajia’de Taiwan moshi ruhe keneng? Ruhe yanxu?”[Ping-chen Lo × Tzen-ping Su × Chang-de Liu∣How to “Fake-Beating” Taiwan-Style Come True? How to Continue?]. (Accessed on June 11, 2021).
62. 陳洧農，2019，〈林照真×劉昌德｜假新聞管制與言論自由〉，https://www.feja.org.tw/48601，查閱時間：2019/11/17。Chen, Wei-nong. 2019. “Lin Chao-chen ×Liu Chang-de∣Jia xinwen guanzhi yu yanlunziyou” [Chaochen Lin × Chang-de Liu｜The Control of Fake News and Freedom of Speech]. (Accessed on November 17, 2019).
63. 陶振超, Chen-chao,劉靜怡, Ching-yi(2019)。假訊息防制工作坊。人文與社會科學簡訊，21(1)，99-107。
64. 黃炎東, Yuan-dong(2019)。媒體、政治與法律平衡點之探討。人權會訊，131，41-57。
65. 黃紀，2018，〈第二十六次總統滿意度電訪及手機調查案之研究設計（TEDS2018_PA12）〉，http://teds.nccu.edu.tw/data1/super_pages.php?ID=data201，查閱時間：2019/02/18。Huang, Chi. 2018. “Di ershiliu ci zongtong manyidu dianfang ji shouji diaochaan zhi yanjiu sheji (TEDS2018_PA12)” [Taiwan’s Election and Democratization Study, 2016-2020 (III): Telephone and Mobile Phone Interview Survey of the Presidential Satisfaction--The Twenty-Sixth Wave (TEDS2018_PA12)]. (Accessed on February 18, 2018).
66. 黃紀, Chi(2012)。台灣選舉與民主化調查台灣選舉與民主化調查,台北=Taipei:國立台灣大學政治學系=Department of Political Science, National Taiwan University。
67. 蔡佳泓, Chia-hung(2019)。財團法人臺灣民主基金會委託研究報告財團法人臺灣民主基金會委託研究報告,台北=Taipei:國立政治大學選舉研究中心=Election Study Center, National Chengchi University。
68. 賴麒元, Chi-yuan,王嵩音, Song-in(2021)。Facebook 假新聞第三人效果研究。傳播與社會學刊，55，19-56。
69. 羅文輝, Ven-hwei(2001)。性策略理論，性別，第三人效果與支持限制色情媒介。新聞學研究，63，201-222。
70. 羅文輝, Ven-hwei(2000)。媒介負面內容與社會距對第三人效果認知的影響。新聞學研究，65，95-129。

1. (2024)。因應AI來襲選舉假訊息之法制與機制研究。中國地方自治，77(2)，3-28。