【作者】 屠正锋；

【导师】 李良荣；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 传播学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 本文研究的核心问题有两个：(1)中国传媒业的运行为什么需要监管与规范?(2)应当如何监管与规范中国传媒业的运行?第一个问题“为什么需要监管与规范”，源于对当前中国传媒业运行中一系列问题的反思。传媒业一派繁荣景象背后，实际上弊病丛生：有偿新闻、低俗之风、新闻炒作已经成为社会三大公害：国有资产流失、寻租和腐败问题愈演愈烈；行政垄断扭曲了市场机制，造成了市场秩序混乱。这些问题表象都集中指向一点：传媒业过度追逐自身的个体利益，牺牲了大众传媒业的公共利益。因此，传媒业监管的核心课题是迫使传媒业必须承担应该承担的社会责任，维护公共利益。传媒业的公共利益是本文研究的起点。传媒业作为社会传播系统的连结点，是社会公众知的权利和表达权利的受托人，因而必须服务于公共利益。尽管人们对于公共利益的界定尚存在争议，但就传媒业而言，无论是从经验的角度还是从建构的角度，都证明传媒业的公共利益责任是存在的。从实践经验来看，传媒业发达国家，无论实行强调市场竞争的自由市场体制还是民主参与的公共媒介体制，都承认媒体所担负公共利益责任，只不过实现手段、政府干预的程度和方式有所差异。从建构的角度来看，传媒业公共利益是在各种不同利益博弈的基础上形成的利益共集，其性质要求媒体服务于公众普遍的共同利益。中国当代传媒业不仅承担着政治喉舌工具的职能，同时又是政府举办的公共事业，负有向社会全体成员提供普遍的公共服务的责任，此外，还承担了国有资产的受托责任。因此，中国传媒业的公共利益原则，主要考虑的应有以下几个方面：(1)普遍服务原则；(2)正确舆论导向原则；(3)国有资产保值增值原则。比照上述公共利益原则，本文从微观传媒机构与宏观体制互动的角度分析了传媒业公共利益损失的具体成因，主要分为三个方面：(1)市场机制本身无法完全实现公共利益。传媒业市场个体追寻自身利益最大化的理性行为，必然导致其追逐能使其收入最大化的人群，富有文化价值的公共产品提供不足；(2)现行的传媒市场存在缺陷。市场分割和行政垄断进一步加剧了传媒业的效率损失，公共利益受损；(3)媒体内部治理结构存在问题。所有者缺位、经理人缺位、产权模糊以及从业人员自利行为失控，导致寻租、舞弊行为扩散，损及公共利益。对于传媒业公共利益损失成因的分析，引出了本文的第二个问题“如何来对传媒业进行规范和监管”。现行的传媒体制和政府管制方式的缺陷，要求传媒业的体制转向以维护公共利益为目标的科学监管体系。首先，必须夯实监管体系所需的制度基础，包括“目标相容”、“产权清晰”、“市场有序”等要素。“目标相容”，要求政府和传媒的职能分开，媒体的商业与公共服务职能分开，传媒市场主要由各类媒介来充当主体，并辅之以公共服务机构作为补充，政府根据媒体性质不同进行分类监管；“产权清晰”，要求不同性质的媒体分类改制，部分可以商业化的媒体应当产权多元化，并通过特许经营权、有限合伙等各种权利形式来加以约束；“市场有序”要求打破行政垄断和市场分割，通过充分竞争来获得规模经济和范围经济。其次，在宏观层面上建立外部监管体系。从监管立法、监管机构职能、产权体系等方面调整传媒宏观体制，针对不同产权结构的传媒进行分类监管，并建立许可经营权管理、竞争秩序、信息披露等具体的制度安排。许可证管理的激励规制政策很大程度上改善了传统监管的不足，是我国传媒业监管的可行方向。最后，在微观层面上完善媒介内部运营规范。在传媒产业和公共服务分类改制的基础上，从产权架构角度，针对传媒企业和公共服务组织不同类型完善内部治理结构，建立考核问责、内部控制机制，以及指导媒体建立有效的自律机制。更多还原

【Abstract】 The dissertation discusses two key questions why China’s media sector need regulation and how to regulate the media.The first question why media need regulation derives from rethinking on flaws in current media sector functioning. Behind prosperity of China’s media, maladies spread out. Paid-for news, vulgar contents and uproarious press become three social effects of pollution; state-owned assets embezzlement, corruption and rent-seeking arise; administrative monopoly distorts the market mechanism and mess up the market order. These phenomena above converge at one point that media pursue its self-interest in excess and sacrifice the public interest. Hence, the main issue of media regulation is to lay the media under the obligation of public interest and to maintain public interest.Public interest of media is the start of research in the dissertation. Media must service public interest because media, as the juncture of social communication network, is the trustee of public’s rights to know and express. Though people dispute over the definition of public interest, as for media, whether experientially or constructively, public interest of media exists is evitable. Experientially, countries whose media sector are developed, whether adopting the laissez-faire system emphasizing on market competition or the public media system stressing democratic participation, acknowledge the media’s responsibility for public interest, though the extent and method of implements and intervention differ. Constructively, media’s public interest is the common aggregate formed by individual interest gaming and obliged to service public’s common and shared interest.China’s current media sector assumes the function of political voice, the responsibility of public service as public utility established by government and the fiduciary obligation of state-owned media assets. Therefore, principles of public interest of China’s media sector should mainly think about three aspects: (1) universal service obligations; (2) right orientation of public opinion; (3) preservation and appreciation of state-owned capital.According to these principles of public interest, the dissertation analyzed the causation of public interest’ loss through the interactive approach between micro media structure and macro system, which divided into three aspects: (1) Market mechanism itself cannot meet the entire public interest because individual rational behavior pursuing self-interest in the media market incline to meet the needs of whom maximizing media’s income and make the supply of public goods with culture value insufficient; (2) Flaws embedded in market mechanism, such as market disseverance and administrative monopoly, increase the loss of efficiency and public interest; (3) Disfigurations of internal governance structure such as absence of owner and agent, illegibility of property rights and uncontrolled exploitation of self-interest spread out corruption and malpractice, which damage public interest.The analysis of media public interest’s loss leads to the second question how to regulate media. To avoid faults in current media system and government control, the system should change into scientific regulation system towards public interest.Firstly, tamp the institutional foundation of media regulation, including compatibility of objectives, clarity of ownership, and order of market. Compatibility of objectives requires separate function of media from government to make media as the main body in the market, assisted with public service media, and launch classified regulations on different media by government. Clarity of ownership claims that different media should reform abided by different mode and some commercial media should introduce multi-ownership under the control of multi forms of rights, such as concessionary rights or limited partnership. Order of market requires break the administrative monopoly and market disseverance to take advantages of scale and scope of economy through sufficient competition.Secondly, establish external regulation system on macro-level. It should adjust the media system includes regulation legislation, organization, and function, regulate media separately by their classification and form institutional arrangements such as concessionary rights, competition order, disclosure of information. Rules of license amend the disadvantages of traditional regulation, which is the future direction of our media regulation.Finally, improve the internal governance of media on micro-level. Based on classified reforms of media industry and public service, it should enhance the internal governance according to different ownership structure, establish assessment and accountability mechanism, build internal control mechanism, and guide media to actualize effective self-discipline standard.更多还原