论文部分内容阅读
今年3·15国际消费者权益日的前一天,南京街头发生这样一件事:来自连云港市钱江宾馆的经理陈恩,抡起铁锤将一台上海产“双菱”牌空调机砸毁。众多围观者议论纷纷,有人认为这是消费者对“问题商品”的无奈之举,有人说,这是“激情维权”,更多的人则认为这是一种商业炒作或另有所图。 对这一突如其来的事件,南京多家新闻媒体作了报道,因其报道的广度、深度不一样,社会效果也有所不同。这里仅就扬子晚报、金陵晚报和服务导报三家报纸的报道作一比较、分析。 三家报纸都在3月15日的一版显著位置,刊登这条“昨日新闻”,扬子晚报的标题:肩题——昨天南
This year 3.15 International Consumer Rights Day, the day before, Nanjing Street, one such thing occurred: Lianyungang City, Qianjiang Hotel Manager Chen En, hammer from a Shanghai-made “Shuangling” brand air conditioner smashed . Many onlookers have talked about each other. Some people think that this is a helpless move by consumers on the “problemd goods.” Some people say that this is “passion activism,” and more people think it is a commercial speculation or another illustration. For this unexpected incident, a number of news media in Nanjing made reports because of their different coverage and depth, and different social effects. Here only on the Yangtze Evening News, Jinling Evening News and Service Herald reported three newspapers for a comparison, analysis. The three newspapers all have a prominent position in a March 15 edition of the “yesterday’s news”, the title of the Yangzi Evening Post: Shoulin question - Yesterday, South