Media Coverage of Hazard Events: Analyzing the Assumptions*

Despite the widespread conviction that the mass media tend to “blow risks out of proportion,” the question has received little systematic attention. The mass-media literature also presents the opposite argument, namely that the media minimize the kinds of reporting that might upset large-scale capitalistic industries. Still other perspectives hold, on the one hand, that media reports tend to have more subtle anti-technology effects, created by “even-handed” coverage and on the other hand, that reporters give “establishment” figures the opportunity to “keynote” or “put the facts in perspective” in ways that exert a subtly pro-technology effect. Drawing on a systematic sample of 128 hazard events developed by researchers at another university and factually summarized by Lexis -Nexis , we analyze the effects of emotionalism on actual levels of coverage; a variety of analyses show that the only variables to exert significant effects are those that involve objective information, such as the number of casualties or the level of damage created. Given the argument that the effects of emotionalism can be conveyed in ways that are largely independent of the facts, e.g., by headlines, photographs, and “loaded” words, we next compare the emotionalism conveyed by factual summaries vs. the original stories and headlines. Even for incidents involving nuclear and/or toxic hazards, we find the net effect of the full stories is to lessen the emotionalism. Overall, the hypothesis receiving strongest support is that the “keynoting” helps create an overall impression that the “responsible authorities” are acting more responsibly than might be assumed on the basis of factual summaries alone. The widespread impression within the technical community, while understandable, may well have as much to do with the selective perceptions of scientists and engineers as with the actual pattern of media reporting.     

Aiming for the discursive high ground: Monsanto and the biotechnology controversy

The past several years have seen the publication of a great deal of exciting theoretical work on ideology and discourse. There has, however, been much less empirical work in the area. In this essay, we undertake a study of a specific set of discursive products developed by Monsanto Corporation in its efforts to shape public opinion and the terms of debate in the controversy over the development of biotechnology. Drawing on existing work, we suggest that relationships between signifiers and signifieds are not natural, but social creations, and that the creation of signs is often the product of social struggles. We show how Monsanto has drawn on discursive elements with historical resonance to create an image of biotechnology that the company hopes will lead to public support for the technology or, at the very least, will stifle opposition.     

梁武帝舍道事佛考辨

梁武帝舍道事佛的时间,佛教典籍中有四种记载。虽然这些文献记载多有矛盾之处,但武帝舍道事佛之疏、敕文不为伪作。据法琳《辩正论》辑录相关文献中数人身份的考察,武帝舍道事佛当在大同后期(539～545),与自己欲出任白衣僧正有关。舍道事佛对道教的影响非常有限。在唐初佛道论争日渐激烈的情形下,僧人依托此事攻击道教、弘扬佛法。     

“Are they allowed to do that?” Content and typology of corporate socio-political positioning on TWITTER. A study of DAX-30 companies in Germany

In the USA, corporate attitude communication has been identified as an irreversible trend. Outside the USA, it is a comparatively new phenomenon. We have conducted a content-analytical study on the publicly communicated socio-political positioning of DAX-30 corporations and their CEOs in Germany. Based on the Corporate Social Advocacy (CSA) approach, our results reveal a typology of different strategies. It shows that the companies under investigation differ significantly in terms of the degree of controversy and positioning frequency. The study provides evidence that corporate characteristics (e.g. size), timing and thematic factors, as well as the communicative behavior of other companies/organizations determine positioning strategies. We identified two different strategic motives for socio-political positioning: The aim to (1) further improving trust, image, and reputation while avoiding risk as far as possible or (2) to secure room for maneuver within the framework of specific, very concrete (socio-political) challenges and in doing so accepting certain risks in the process.     

对大学排行榜争议的辨析

大学排行榜是非政府机构参与我国高等教育评价的一种重要方式,在我国已存在20多年了。尽管有了一定的发展基础,但还存在诸多不完善之处,因此社会各界对大学排行榜一直争论不休,各抒己见.本文企图通过理性认识大学排行榜的本质和作用,为其进行合理辩解。     

信任与建设性争辩对科研团队创造力影响的实证研究

如何提高科研团队创造力是科研管理的一个重要课题。本文目的在于探寻科研团队内信任与建设性争辩的相互作用机制及其对团队创造力的影响,在回顾国内外相关研究文献的基础上,利用问卷调查,对中国科学院6所科研院所的163名科研团队成员进行施测。研究结果显示:在科研团队内,信任与建设性争辩和团队创造力都呈正相关关系;建设性争辩与团队创造力呈正相关关系;信任通过建设性争辩的中介作用来促进团队创造力。本文的研究结论对科研管理具有一定的理论和实践指导意义。     

行政管辖略论

行政管辖是行政机关之间就某一类行政事务的首次处理所作的权限划分。行政机关基于行政管辖的法律规定所享有的权力就是行政管辖权。行政管辖可分为一般管辖与特殊管辖。就对某一事务何者享有管辖权,行政机关之间所发生的冲突即为行政管辖的争议。依据争议的不同类型,对其可采取不同的解决办法。     

究竟该如何反思“现代中国学术”?——为纪念五四新文化运动百周年而作

西潮东渐以来,中国学术思想遭遇了急剧的范式变迁与转型。学术范式的转型,从表层看,即学术观念、学术方法和学术话语体系的转型;从深层看,则意味着世界观念的转变、历史观念的变迁、文化整合机制的变革和表意范式的新变。通常来讲,这两个层面交互发生,共同演变。然而,由于普遍缺乏对后一个层面的问题的敏感,使得当代学界对现代中国学术的反思,就大都停留在极为浅表的层面。如是,试图通过对现代中国学术史的反省,以找到现代中国学术持续变革的正确之道,并重建当代中国人文学术的话语体系,就必将沦为泡影。为此,有必要通过究竟什么是“现代中国学术”这一基本问题的反思,重新彰显学术史变迁的表层和深层问题的复杂关联,以促进当代中国学界对现代中国学术史的重估自觉。     

中国社会史论战的学术定位再认识

关于20世纪30年代的中国社会史论战,主流学界将其视之为一场马克思主义与非马克思主义之间的论争.这一定位以政治立场界分学术派别,武断地缩小了马克思主义史家范围,没有认清马克思主义史学的真正对手.毛泽东的"文化围剿"说是形成这一看法的重要依据.然而,若从纯粹学术的角度看,论战是在马克思主义的话语系统内进行的,是唯物史观的内部争论.这是因为:第一,依据马克思主义、唯物史观研治中国史是论战各方共同的理论立场;第二,论战各方基本遵循和使用了唯物史观的原理和术语.总之,视角在政治与学术之间的切换,造成了论战学术定位的巨大差异.     

建设性论辩模式在EFL课堂讨论中的应用

本文探讨了建设性论辩模式在EFL课堂讨论中的应用。通过介绍建设性论辩模式的基本概念、关键假设和组织规则，本文设计了建设性论辩模式应用于EFL课堂讨论的教学环节和操作步骤，并在话题选择、材料准备和教师角色三个方面提出了相关建议，以期为教学实践提供参照。