環境議題的媒體關注與長期報導量分析：以國內外報紙媒體為例

Analysis of Media Attention and Long-Term Media Coverage of Environmental Issues: with Examples of Domestic and Foreign Newspapers

10.6555/JEER.16.2.001

楊意菁(Yie-Jing Yang)

中外報紙媒體 ； 報導量分析 ； 媒體關注 ； 環境議題 ； domestic and foreign newspapers ； quantity of coverage theory ； media attention ； environmental issues

環境教育研究

16卷2期（2020 / 12 / 01）

1 - 45

繁體中文

本研究採用媒體報導量分析方法剖析報紙新聞，總共分析了1987-2017年國內外五家報紙媒體（《聯合報》、《中國時報》、《經濟日報》、《蘋果日報》與《New York Times》），進行媒體關注與環境議題之探討與比較分析。研究結果發現，「核能」、「水資源」以及「氣候變遷」是報紙媒體長期關注的環境議題，最少被報導的議題為「糧食危機」以及「基因改造」。四家國內媒體對於環境議題的關注，也不盡相同。《聯合報》與《中國時報》最關注的議題，分別是「水資源」、「核能」以及「空氣品質」，《經濟日報》長期以來最為關注的議題則是「節能減碳」，《蘋果日報》報導的環境議題與其它報紙有著較大的差異，最為關注的議題是「食品安全」。比對國內媒體《聯合報》與國外媒體《New York Times》發現，臺灣媒體的報導量明顯少於國外媒體。兩報對於環境議題的關注亦有所不同，「氣候變遷」議題長期以來受到國外媒體很大的關注。國內報紙除了「基因改造」、「塑化劑」、「節能減碳」議題，報導量較國外多，其他議題報導量皆少於國外媒體。唯一國內外媒體同樣關注的議題，即為「核能」議題。

In this study, quantity of coverage theory was applied for the analysis of environmental issues reported by print media. A total of five domestic and foreign newspapers from 1987 to 2017 (United Daily News, China Times, Economic Daily News, Apple Daily, and The New York Times) were analyzed for discussing about media attention and environmental issues. The results showed that ＂nuclear energy＂, ＂water resources＂ and ＂climate change＂ were the environmental issues that have long been the focus of newspaper media. The least reported issues were ＂food crisis＂ and ＂genetic modification＂. The coverage of environmental issues by the four domestic newspapers was also different. United Daily News and China Times focused more on ＂water resources＂, ＂nuclear energy＂ and ＂air quality＂ related issues, while the Economic Daily News focused more on ＂energy saving and carbon reduction＂. The focus of environmental issues reported by Apple Daily was ＂food safety＂, which was quite different from the others. Comparing the domestic media, United Daily News, with the foreign media, The New York Times, it was found that Taiwan press had significantly less coverage than foreign press. The two newspapers also differed in their attention to environmental issues, with the issue of ＂climate change＂ receiving a great deal of attention from foreign media for a long time. Except for ＂genetic modification＂, ＂plasticizer＂ and ＂energy saving and carbon reduction＂, which received more coverage in the domestic newspapers, all other issues received less coverage than in the foreign media. The only issue of equal interest to both domestic and foreign media was related to ＂nuclear energy＂.

1. 左宗宏, T.-H.(2008)。2004 年臺灣總統大選傳統媒體、公眾與網路討論議題之關聯分析。傳播與管理研究，7(2)，73-106。
   連結：
2. 何旭初, H.-C.(2007)。市場導向新聞學之思維與運作：《蘋果日報》個案分析。中華傳播學刊，11，243-273。
   連結：
3. 李子甜, Z.,徐美苓, M.-L.(2020)。《人民日報》霧霾新聞框架建構(2011-2017)。新聞學研究，142，59-109。
   連結：
4. 周桂田, K.-T.(2005)。知識、科學與不確定性─專家與科技系統的「無知」如何建構風險。政治與社會哲學評論，13，131-180。
   連結：
5. 林子倫, T.-L.(2008)。臺灣氣候變遷政策之論述分析。公共行政學報，28，153-175。
   連結：
6. 徐美苓, M.-L.(2019)。風險感知、價值觀、議題傳播及空污防制行為意向。新聞學研究，138，25-73。
   連結：
7. 張春炎, C.-Y.,楊樺, A. H.,葉欣誠, S.-C.(2019)。院線環境紀錄片作為環境教育影片的反思與分析：以±2℃、看見臺灣為例。環境教育研究，15(2)，45-79。
   連結：
8. 郭文平, W.-P.(2017)。緩慢開展的危害再現：媒介報導中的旱災、 風險及氣候變遷論述之語料分析。傳播研究與實踐，7(1)，37-70。
   連結：
9. 陳映均, S.-T,李松濤, S.-T.(2017)。社會性科學議題新聞的框架分析─以基因改造新聞為例。科學教育學刊，25(S)，439-462。
   連結：
10. 楊意菁, Y.-J.(2017)。風險溝通、媒體關注與框架分析：以新聞再現企業環境相關議題為例。傳播研究與實踐，7(1)，71-106。
    連結：
11. 葉欣誠, S.-C.(2017)。探討環境教育與永續發展教育的發展脈絡。環境教育研究，13(2)，69-109。
    連結：
12. 鄭安授, A.-S.(2019)。福島事件後臺灣核能議題的媒體再現。問題與研究，58(2)，29-89。
    連結：
13. 謝君蔚, J.-W.,徐美苓, M.-L.(2011)。媒體再現科技發展與風險的框架與演變：以基因改造食品新聞為例。中華傳播學刊，20，143-179。
    連結：
14. 關鍵評論 (2014) 。 2013 熱門大事回顧 ： 食品安全事件總整理 。取自https://www.thenewslens.com/article/1892【The News Lens (2014). 2013 hot events review: Summary of food safety events. Retrieved from https://www.thenewslens.com/article/1892】
15. 關鍵評論(2017 年 7 月 13 日)。基改食品的世紀騙局：生技產業四巨頭如何支配操弄美國管理機構的政策？取自 https://www.thenewslens.com/article/72675【The News Lens (2017, July 13). The century scam of genetically modified foods: how do the Big Four biotechnology industry control and manipulate the policies of US regulatory agencies? Retrieved from https://www.thenewslens.com/article/72675】
16. Amber, E.,Boydstun, A. E.,Hardy, A.,Walgrave, S.(2014).Two faces of media attention: media storm versus non-storm coverage.Political Communication,31,509-531.
17. Andrew, K. T.,Caren, N.(2010).Making the news: movement organization, media attention, and the public agenda.American Sociological Review,75(6),841-866.
18. Boykoff, M. T.(2007).Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006.Area,39(4),470-481.
19. Boykoff, M. T.,Boykoff, J. M.(2007).Climate change and journalistic norms: a case study of mass media coverage.Geoforum,38,1190-1204.
20. Boykoff, M. T.,Luedeck, T.(2016).Elite news coverage of climate change.Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science
21. Brulle, R. J.,Carmichael, J.,Jenkins, J. C.(2012).Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010.Climate Change,114(2),169-188.
22. Clark, F.,Illman, D. L.(2006).A longitudinal study of the New York Times science times section.Science Communication,27(4),496-513.
23. Corfee-Morlot, J.,Maslin, M.,Burgess, J.(2007).Global warming in the public sphere.Physical and Engineering Sciences,365(1860),2741-2776.
24. Cox, R.(2013).Environmental communication and the public sphere.Los Angeles, CA:Sage.
25. Djerf-Pierre, M.(2012).When attention drives attention: issue dynamics in environmental news reporting over five decades.European Journal of Communication,27(3),291-304.
26. Downs, A.(1972).Up and down with ecology─the 'issue-attention cycle.The Public Interest,28,38-50.
27. Eyck, T. A. T.,Williment, M.(2003).The national media and things: genetic coverage in the New York Times (1971–2001) and the Washington post (1977-2001).Science Communication,25(2),129-152.
28. Green, H.(2007).The greening of America’s campuses.Business Week,40(29),62-65.
29. Gutteling, J. M.(2005).Mazur’s hypothesis on technology controversy and media.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,17(1),23-41.
30. Huang, J.,Yang, J. Z.(2019).Beyond under the dome: an environmental documentary amplified public risk perception about air pollution in China.Journal of Risk Research,23(2),227-241.
31. Li, Q.,Yang, Y.(2018).A comparative study of discursive constructions of Chinese smog documentary in American and Chinese news coverage.Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a La Comunicación,75,205-228.
32. Mazur, A.(2016).How did the fracking controversy emerge in the period 2010-2012?.Public Understanding of Science,25(2),207-222.
33. Mazur, A.(1998).Global environmental change in the news—1987-90 vs. 1992-6.International Sociology,13(4),457-472.
34. Mazur, A.(2009).American generation of environmental warnings: avian influenza and global warming.Human Ecology Review,16(1),17.
35. MBA 智庫百科(2015 年 11 月 10 日)。環境風險。取自 https://wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/【MBA Think Tank Encyclopedia (2015). Environmental risks. Retrieved from https://wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/】
36. McCombs, M. E.,Shaw, D.(1972).The agenda-setting function of mass media.Public Opinion Quarterly,36,176-187.
37. Mello, S.(2015).Media coverage of toxic risks: a content analysis of pediatric environmental health information available to new and expecting mothers.Health Communication,30(12),1245-1255.
38. Nisbet, M. C.,Huge, M.(2006).Attention cycles and frames in the plant biotechnology debate.The International Journal of Press/Politics,11(2),3-40.
39. Noelle-Neumann, E.,Mathes, R.(1987).The events as events and the events as news: the significance of consonance for media effects research.European Journal of Communication,2,391-414.
40. Petersen, K. K.(2010).Revisiting Downs' issue-attention cycle: international terrorism and U.S. public opinion.Journal of Strategic Security,4(2),1-16.
41. Polman, J. L.,Hope, J. M. G.(2014).Science news stories as boundary objects affecting engagement with science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,51(3),315-341.
42. Quesnel, K. J.,Ajami, N. K.(2017).Changes in water consumption linked to heavy news media coverage of extreme climatic events.Social Advance,3(10),e1700784.
43. Schmidt, A.,Ivanova, A.,Schäfer, M. S.(2013).Media attention for climate change around the world: A comparative analysis of newspaper coverage in 27 countries.Global Environmental Change,23(5),1233-1248.
44. Stauffacher, M.,Muggli, N.,Scolobig, A.,Moser, C.(2015).Framing deep geothermal energy in mass media: the case of Switzerland.Technological Forecasting and Social Change,98,60-70.
45. udn 轉角國際(2020 年 4 月 22 日)。餓死 2 億 6,500 萬人？世界糧食計劃署：「聖經等級大饑荒」將至。取自https://global.udn.com/global_vision/story/8662/4509973【udn Global (2020, April 22). Starved to 265 million people? World Food Program: "famines of biblical proportions" is coming. Retrieved fromhttps://global.udn.com/global_vision/story/8662/4509973】
46. UNESCO(1978).,Paris:UNESCO ED/MD/49.
47. Walgrave, S.,Soroka, S. N.,Nuytemans, M.(2008).The mass media's political agenda-setting power: a longitudinal analysis of media, parliament, and government in Belgium (1993 to 2000).Comparative Political Studies,41(6),814-836.
48. Wilkins, L.,Patterson, P.(1987).Risk analysis and the construction of news.Journal of Communication,37(3),80-92.
49. Zhuang, J.,Cox, J. G.,Chung, M.,Hamm, J. A.,Zwickle, A.,Upham, B. L.(2019).Risk, stigma, trustworthiness, and citizen participation—a multifaceted analysis of media coverage of dioxin contamination in Midland, Michigan.International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,16(21),4165.
50. 江盛, S.(2012)。臺灣的空氣汙染、環境和疾病。生態臺灣，35，9-14。
51. 呂奕欣（譯）, Y.-X.(Trans.),鄭佩嵐（譯）, P.-L.(Trans.),Denney, D.(2009).面對風險社會.臺北=Taipei:韋伯文化=Weber Publication.
52. 李文昭（譯）, W.-Z.(Trans.),Carson, R. L.(2018).寂靜的春天.臺北=Taipei:星辰出版社=Morning Star.
53. 李永寧, Y.,吳曄, Y.,張倫, L.(2019)。2010-2016 年公共議題的公眾注意力周期變化研究。國際新聞界雜誌
54. 周桂田, K.-T.(2003)。全球化風險下之風險溝通與風險評估─以 SARS 為 Case 分析。2003 臺灣社會學年會 2003，臺北市=Taipei city:
55. 周桂田, K.-T.(2007)。「環境與風險」專輯導讀。科技、醫療與社會，5，11-14。
56. 林俊田（編）, J. C.(ed.),周桂田（編）, K. T.(ed.)(2017).氣候變遷下的國家發展藍圖.臺北=Taipei:臺大出版中心=National Taiwan University Press.
57. 林義晃, Y.-H(2003)。臺中市=Taichung City，國立臺中教育大學=National Taichung University of Education。
58. 邱鴻峰, H.-F.(2015)。美國主流報紙的中國環境形象建構：「議題關注週期」視角。新聞界，9，18-25。
59. 食力網站(2019 年 1 月 8 日)。回顧塑化劑污染食品事件：我們學到什麼教訓？取自 https://www.foodnext.net/science/scsource/paper/5593270778【FoodNEXT (2019, January 8). Recalling the food contamination incident with plasticizers: What lessons have we learned. Retrieved fromhttps://www.foodnext.net/science/scsource/paper/5593270778】
60. 徐美苓, M.-L.(2015)。新興環境議題的媒體建構：以臺灣替代能源新聞報導為例。傳播與社會，32，19-57。
61. 徐美苓, M.-L.,楊意菁, Y.-J.(2011)。科技風險與全球暖化報導品質分析。2011中華傳播學會年會 2011，新竹市=Hsinchu City:
62. 高玉馨、王御風(2015 年 6 月 24 日)。乾旱專題報導(一)：臺灣 2015 乾旱的面面觀。取自 https://scitechvista.nat.gov.tw/c/skcW.htm【Gao, Y.-X., Wang, Y.-F. (2015, June 24). Drought special report (1): a comprehensive view of Taiwan's drought in 2015. Retrieved from https://scitechvista.nat.gov.tw/c/skcW.htm】
63. 陳香蘭(2017 年 12 月 12 日)。1217 反空污大遊行中、南部居民站出來救健康。取自 https://newtalk.tw/news/view/2017-12-12/106798【Chen, H.-L. (2017, December 12). 1217 Anti-air pollution parade, central and southern residents stand op to save health. Retrieved from https://newtalk.tw/news/view/2017-12-12/106798】
64. 媒體大調查報告(2020)。2020 年第二季【潤利艾克曼公司】媒體大調查報告。取自 https://anm.frog.tw/wp-content/uploads/2020 年第二季【潤利艾克曼公司】媒體大調查報告.pdf【Media survey report (2020). The second quarter of 2020 [Rainmaker XKM Company] The media survey report. Retrieved from https://anm.frog.tw/wp-content/uploads/2020 年第二季【潤利艾克曼公司】媒體大調查報告.pdf】
65. 黃朝恩, C.-E.(1995)。環境議題分析與教學。環境教育，27，20-33。
66. 黃懿慧, Y.-H.(1994).科技風險與環保抗爭─臺灣民眾風險認知個案研究.臺北市=Taipei:五南=Wu-Nan.
67. 臺灣健康空氣行動聯盟(2018 年 01 月 17 日)。2017 年 PM10惡化紅害紫爆增雲林以南肺癌比北部增五成！【新聞稿】。取自https://web.archive.org/web/20180210120955/https://www.civilmedia.tw/archives/73202【Air Clean Taiwan (2018/01/17). In 2017, PM10 worsened, the number of red and purple bursts increased, and the number of lung cancers in the south of Yunlin increased by 50% than in the north. [Press Release]. Retrieved fromhttps://web.archive.org/web/20180210120955/https://www.civilmedia.tw/archives/73202】
68. 劉濤, T.(2011).環境傳播︰話語、修辭與政治.北京=Beijing:北京大學=Peking University.
69. 蔡語嫣(2020 年 5 月 24 日)。新冠肺炎衝擊下，2 億 6500 萬人面臨嚴重飢餓如何預防全球糧食危機？專家點出三大關鍵。取自https://www.storm.mg/article/2674616【Tsai, Y.-Y. (2020, May 24). Under the impact of the covid-19, 265 million people are facing severe hunger. How to prevent the global food crisis? Experts point out three key points.Retrieved from https://www.storm.mg/article/2674616】
70. 環境資訊中心外電(2019 年 1 月 13 日)。近半世紀全球糧食危機升研究：跟極端氣候有關。取自 https://e-info.org.tw/node/216299【Environmental Information Center reports from foreign news (2019, January 13). The global food crisis has risen in the past half century. Research: related to extreme weather.Retrieved from https://e-info.org.tw/node/216299】
71. 蘋果日報(2018 年 1 月 4 日)。空污「早在 2010 就紫爆」竟被當成「霧」。取自https://web.archive.org/web/20180308073047/https://tw.appledaily.com/new/realtime/20180104/1272291/【Apple Daily (2018, January 4). Air pollution "purple explosion as early as 2010" was regarded as "fog". Retrieved from https://e-info.org.tw/node/216299】
72. 顧忠華（編）, C. H.(ed.)(2001).第二現代─風險社會的出路？.臺北市=Taipei City:巨流=Chuliu.

1. 蘇靖雅,譚躍(2023)。臺灣報紙中空污風險的新聞框架：跨時的演變及其內涵。新聞學研究，154，55-112。