论文部分内容阅读
去年,中国新闻界最引人注目的人物报道,可以说是《经济日报》发起的有关“关广梅现象”的讨论。这次持续整整40天的报道并未采用以往的长篇通讯配评论的方式,而是采用了讨论的形式,让读者在不同意见的平等对话中得出自己的结论。这使我想起几年前,为调查有关改革家报道的实际效果,曾到上海一带走访过一些改革家。当时一位正在一所大学里学习的知名改革家对我说,他希望新闻界报道改革家最好能把有争议的问题摆到桌面上,展开公开的讨论.澄清人们对改革家认识上的偏颇。现在看来,他的建议和《经济日报》的作法不谋而合。这种对先进典型——改革家有争议的问题进行公开的讨论,是历史的进步。
Last year, the most eye-catching figures in the Chinese press reported that it could be argued that the Economic Daily launched a discussion on the Guan-Guangmei phenomenon. The 40-day coverage did not follow the style of the long newsletter, but adopted a form of discussion that allowed readers to draw their own conclusions in an equal dialogue with different opinions. This reminds me of a few years ago, in order to investigate the actual effect of the reformers reported, visited some of the reformers in Shanghai. At that time, a prominent reformer who was studying at a university told me that he hoped the press would report that it would be best for the reformers to put the controversial issues on the table and hold open discussions, clarifying what people know about the reformers Biased. It now appears that his proposal coincided with the practice of the Economic Times. This open discussion of the advanced model, the controversial issues of the reformers, is a historical advance.