傳播研究的典範與認同

This paper consists of five topics. First, it begins by elucidating the three layers of meaning in "communication": the classical sense of "making common" among members of a community, transportation, and media. Second, it analyzes the failure in Schramm's early attempt to establish a broad "communication science" as inspired by the "unified science movement," thus revealing the essential tension between "communication science" and "media studies" as a field of inquiry. Third, the paper compares the Chicago School and the Columbia School that informed early media studies in the U.S. and traces the trajectory of their respective influence. Fourth, the author criticizes media studies for its introversive tendency toward what Geerts calls a process of "involution," as researchers pursue technical sophistication at the expense of conceptual innovation. Fifth, to correct the malaise, it argues for integrating "local experiences" with "global theories" in media studies.