论文部分内容阅读
住宅产品因其高价值性和供给有限性而超越了居民个体的私人消费领域,成为一个极具公共性并影响到所有居民特别是中低收入群体的社会领域。对这一公共议题的不同报道和评论,形成了《人民日报》《南方周末》与《环球时报》(2008-2013)之间的差异图景。其中,《人民日报》希望以保障机制满足中低收入者的居住权和所有权,再以市场机制来满足中高收入者的“改善权”与“享受权”;《南方周末》奉行“大市场、小政府”的原则,赞成自由市场经济,主张减少国家干预;而《环球时报》则坚持“大政府、小市场”的原则,更多从稳定的角度来考虑房价问题,希望政府强势介入商品房领域,满足中低收入者的购房愿望。面对均与“体制”有关、影响力巨大的三份报媒之间的高层框架差异,本文认为应在尊重媒体合法报道权利的前提下重提媒体共识,包括低层的专业操守共识和高层的意识形态共识,以期形塑一种致力于解决的建设性媒体言论空间。
Because of its high value and limited supply, residential products go beyond the private consumption of individual residents and become a social area that has great publicity and affects all residents, especially middle and low-income groups. Different reports and comments on this public issue have formed the picture of the differences between the “People’s Daily” “Southern Weekend” and the “Global Times” (2008-2013). Among them, the “People’s Daily” wants to guarantee the residency and ownership of middle and low-income earners with a safeguard mechanism and then satisfy the “right of improvement” and “right of enjoyment” of middle- and high-income earners with market mechanisms; and “Southern Weekend” The “big market, small government” principle, in favor of a free market economy, advocates a reduction of state intervention; and “Global Times” is the “big government, small market” principle, more from a stable point of view of housing prices Problem, I hope the government strong intervention in the realm of real estate to meet the low-income buyers desire to buy. In the face of the high-level framework differences between the three news media both related to “system” and influential, this paper argues that the media consensus should be re-emphasized on the premise of respecting the legitimate rights of media coverage, including low-level professional ethics consensus and High-level ideological consensus, with a view to shaping a space for constructive media to address.