论文部分内容阅读
在吉登斯和鲍德里亚的论述中,大众传媒在生活中起到的作用是不相同的,两位学者在自己的著作中都用一定篇幅对大众传媒进行了分析。鲍德里亚尖锐地指出大众传媒在符号统治中充当了帮凶,而吉登斯则认为作为抽象系统的重要组成部分,大众传播跨越了时空的限制将其他个体的经验传递。鲍德里亚纠结于信息的真实性探讨,而吉登斯则绕过了对真实的追求,关注大众传媒对生活政治的影响。两位学者的不同就在于对人的主体性的看法,鲍德里亚眼中的主体是被符号淹没的主体,而吉登斯却认为主体是能够通过大众传媒经营生活政治的,即大众传媒与生活政治的合谋。
In Giddens and Baudrillard’s discussion, the role of the mass media in life is not the same, with both scholars using a certain length in their writings to analyze the mass media. Baudrillard pointed out sharply that the mass media acted as an accomplice in symbolic rule, while Giddens believed that as an important part of the abstract system, mass communication spread the experience of other individuals beyond the limits of time and space. Baudrillard tangled in the discussion of the authenticity of the information, while Giddens circumvents the pursuit of truth and focuses on the mass media’s impact on life politics. The difference between the two scholars lies in the view of the subjectivity of man. The subject in the eyes of Baudrillard is the subject who is submerged by symbols, and Giddens believes that the subject is capable of running life politics through the mass media, namely mass media and life Political collusion.