论文部分内容阅读
本文从公众对新《广告法》的不理解出发,首先论证保护消费者——而不是促进广告业发展或广告主的表达自由——才是《广告法》的首要目的。新《广告法》中绝大多数对广告内容的规定,虽然看上去限制了广告的表达自由,但却是为了服务于更大的公共利益——保护消费者免受虚假广告欺骗和误导。因此这些规定总体而言是合理且正当的。在此基础上,本文又将讨论扩展到学术言论和专业言论。广告、学术言论和专业言论均处公共对话之外,这三个领域的价值都是为公共对话和社会公众提供可靠的信息、知识或服务。它们有着不同于公共对话的逻辑、原则和正当性基础。把公共对话的规范强加于它们,不仅会破坏它们自身的规律,更会对公共对话和现代社会的运转产生不利影响。
Starting from the public’s ignorance of the new Advertising Law, this article first demonstrates that protecting the consumers - not promoting the development of advertising or the freedom of advertisers - is the primary purpose of the Advertising Law. The vast majority of advertising content provisions in the new Advertising Act, while seemingly limiting the freedom of expression, are intended to serve the larger public interest by protecting consumers from being deceived and misled by false advertisements. Therefore, these rules are generally reasonable and valid. On this basis, this article extends the discussion to academic speech and professional speech. Advertising, academic speech, and professional discourse are all public dialogues, all three of which are valued to provide reliable information, knowledge, or services to public conversations and the general public. They have a different logic, principle and justification basis than public dialogue. Imposing the norms of public dialogue on them not only undermines their own laws, but also adversely affects public dialogue and the functioning of modern society.