公共政策私用现象探析

公共性作为公共政策的基本属性,在实践中面临诸多被背离的风险,公共政策私用现象便是对公共政策之公共性的严重侵蚀,需引起理论和实务界的关注与研究.公共政策之所以被私用,有源自政策主体、政策客体和政策环境方面的综合性诱因,其不良后果体现为浪费社会公共资源、折损政策主体公信力、破坏市场机制运行以及政策法规作用的发挥.要治理公共政策私用,需重视公共选择的作用,拓宽公众参与渠道;加快政治体制改革,协调权利关系;设置专门的政策监督机构等.     

The Sophisticated Public: The Effect of Competing Frames on Public Opinion

Deliberation is the current buzzword among democratic thinkers. Deliberative democracy assumes that deliberation has an effect on the people engaging in the deliberative process. Several studies have demonstrated that this is indeed the case: deliberation increases political knowledge and opinion consistency, as well as mutual understanding and broader tolerance among citizens. In order to verify the findings from these studies and to confront the problems of internal and external validity in the previous studies of deliberation, alternative methodological designs must be applied. Applying an experimental split-sample design using CATI on the Danish electorate reveals how arguments and frames influence public opinion. Across various frames and arguments and political issues, positive (negative) arguments tend to push opinions in a positive (negative) direction. When competing frames are presented to the public, people submit to neither ambivalence nor non-attitudes. Quite to the contrary, people tend to follow their predisposition and provide more consistent opinions. Thus, deliberation composed of various competing frames and arguments facilitates – rather than distorts – sophisticated and considered public opinion.     

Public Opinion, Public Policy and the Welfare State

A recurring problem in political analysis is to link public opinion to public policy. Public opinion has often come to mean the replies to structured questions in representative surveys. The task of connecting opinion and policy is complicated by the difficulty in interpreting replies to these surveys. The burgeoning literature on public opinion and the crisis of the welfare state has failed to provide a consistent account of what aspects of policy might be driven by public demand or vice versa. The interpretations of survey data are either misleading or highly selective. This applies to two crucial areas, attitudes towards poor minorities and opinions about state and private welfare. In order to provide a better understanding of the problems of linking policy and opinion and to offer some guiding principles for research in this area, this paper attempts to clarify some of these difficulties.     

论负面新闻报道的舆论引导

新闻分为正面报道和负面报道。在新媒体时代,以暴露和批评为主的负面报道,也可以有效地剔除糟粕,净化社会环境,张扬人性的力量。因此,要以崭新的思维与视角来做好负面报道,本着信息为本、受众为本的原则,充分尊重老百姓的知情权,对负面新闻报道做到不夸张、不缩小、不遮掩也不渲染,更杜绝"反面文章正面做",客观、公正、及时、准确、全面地将真实情况告诉受众。让负面报道,特别是灾难新闻报道中的人情、仁爱、人文关怀成为人类苦难的"温柔抚摸者",挖掘负面新闻报道的正面效应。同时,做负面新闻报道时,要揭开事实真相,发挥负面报道的舆论引导作用,积极营造廉洁、廉明、廉正的舆论场,匡正社会风气,维护公平正义。     

Public Opinion and the Depth of Labour's Crisis

Labour's current problems are the culmination of long‐term trends flowing from the rising cost of tax‐funded services and welfare and voters’ mounting resistance to higher taxes to pay for them. As a result of this, there is now a big gulf between the attitudes of Labour party members, and in particular the supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, and Labour voters—and an even wider gulf with the extra voters Labour needs to win a future election. This gulf is also wide in relation to a range of other issues, including immigration, education and economic ideology. For Labour to return to government, it needs not just to narrow the gulf in policy, but to persuade voters of its ‘valence’ virtues of trust and competence—qualities in relation to which Labour currently lags the Conservatives by large margins.     

监督舆论与舆论监督:网络公民权利与公共权力的进退与平衡

监督舆论与舆论监督是话语干涉的两种形式,存在主体性、结果性、立场性、技术性的权力差异。监督舆论形成公共权力的积极进制、消极进制、无效进制,引导舆论朝着积极正向的方向发展,但也易造成舆论的说教化与虚假化。舆论监督形成公共权力的强制化、主动化、圈层化、边缘化的退制,适应公意的变化,提倡公民权利约束公共权力,保证权力运行的合法化与公开化,存在舆论控制权力的风险,出现群体审判与群氓政治的现象。监督舆论与舆论监督应达到有限性平衡、动态性平衡、有效性平衡、竞争性平衡,保证公共权力与公民权利的相互制衡,达到善治的目的,进而实现公共权力与舆论机制的优化,促进社会现代化的和谐发展。     

论网络舆情对政府制定公共政策的影响

当前我国处于网络信息新时代,网络舆情是政府了解民意的重要渠道和方法,对于民意的征求也应适当地采取网络投票、提问等方式。网络传播方式已成为我国公众表达利益诉求、维护自身权益的重要公共平台。因此,网络舆情对政府制定决策有着重要的影响,同时伴随着很大的压力,并且网络舆情的积极作用与消极作用并存,所以网络舆情状态下政府如何制定好公共政策成为考验政府能力的一个挑战。     

威尔逊公共舆论监督思想的现代意义

威尔逊的公共舆论监督思想之主要观点是树立公共舆论的权威及统治地位;公共舆论只能是先以公众开始,结束于公众;公共舆论有层次之分;公共舆论监督必须有一支良好的文官队伍,有赖于公共信息公开。建立在有关法律基础上的言论自由构成了舆论监督合法性的基础。我国在实现舆论监督上应加快立法步伐,坚持舆论监督“量”与“度”的统一,上层舆论与下层舆论的统一,坚持公共舆论监督三个层次的统一,要有一支高素质的公务员队伍,坚持政务公开。     

大学生网络舆论从众心理的探究

随着网络的发展,网络舆论行为是大学生当下一种新的交际方式。大学生网络舆论以理性表达为主,但由于网络舆论内容广泛性,网络舆论形成的信息来源良莠不齐,从而出现众多大学生网络舆论从众现象。由此对大学生提出有建设性的指导意见:提高大学生对网络信息的判断力和抵制力;正本清源,努力净化信息环境;关注网络道德,正确引导学生心理。     

The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion

Political parties play a vital role in democracies by linking citizens to their representatives. Nonetheless, a longstanding concern is that partisan identification slants decision-making. Citizens may support (oppose) policies that they would otherwise oppose (support) in the absence of an endorsement from a political party—this is due in large part to what is called partisan motivated reasoning where individuals interpret information through the lens of their party commitment. We explore partisan motivated reasoning in a survey experiment focusing on support for an energy law. We identify two politically relevant factors that condition partisan motivated reasoning: (1) an explicit inducement to form an “accurate” opinion, and (2) cross-partisan, but not consensus, bipartisan support for the law. We further provide evidence of how partisan motivated reasoning works psychologically and affects opinion strength. We conclude by discussing the implications of our results for understanding opinion formation and the overall quality of citizens’ opinions.     

Public Opinion, Political Communication and the Internet

In contemporary society public opinion is generally mediated by the mass media, which has come to encompass the Habermasian 'public sphere'. This arena is now characterised by the conflict between market and democratic principles, by competing interests of politicians and the media. The presentation of information for debate becomes distorted. The opinion of the 'public' is no longer created through deliberation, but is constructed through systems of communication, in conflict with political actors, who seek to retain control of the dissemination of information. The expansion of the internet as a new method of communication provides a potential challenge to the primacy of the traditional media and political parties as formers of public opinion.