在传播盈余的革命性时代，新闻真实正面临越来越多的争议与挑战。研究强调新闻真实的“系统性”特征，阐明了为什么真相在新闻业中仍然至关重要，以及为什么新闻真实是一个比许多人想象的都更为复杂的问题。通过对全球32位学者和新闻从业者的半结构式访谈，以及中国、澳大利亚和欧洲四种不同所有制类型媒介平台的实地考察，研究在全球化背景下探讨了新闻真实，集中解决了三个关键问题:新闻真实指的是什么?为何需要新闻真实？如何更好地追求新闻真实? 研究运用了多种不同的真理观，包括卡尔?波普尔、理查德?罗蒂、吉安尼?瓦蒂莫和卡尔?马克思的真理观，来强调和理解四种不同的媒介平台，总结了四种新闻真实模式：“证伪模式”（一点资讯辟谣算法）,“实用主义公共服务模式”（澳大利亚RMIT ABC Fact Check），“对话—阐释模式”(荷兰独立新闻机构De Correspondent)和“社会和谐—实践模式”（人民日报《求证》栏目）。发现四种模式的共同之处在于它们均从批判的角度理解真相，反对客观真相的给定性和绝对性。 整个研究对有关新闻真实的简单化认知及其所依据的教条和偏见提出了质疑。研究认为，新闻真实是一个基于语境的、复杂的、多维度的问题，具有历史偶然性和地理差异性。研究对新闻业中正统的“客观性”原则和“真理符合论”提出了质疑，阐明了希腊语中象征真相的“无蔽”及与之相关的“开放”和“透明”理念更有利于在媒介平台和公众之间建立信任，并就何为真相达成共识。研究对新闻真实只是认识论的教条进行了批判，认为其也是价值论的和实践论问题。研究着重阐明了马克思对以实践为基础的真理观的理解，将其作为对资产阶级意识形态的强烈批判与去蔽和对人民群众的支持。通过运用马克思主义真理观对人民日报《求证》栏目的分析，研究批判了社会主义新闻业重宣传而不关心真相的偏见。 研究提出了传播盈余背景下真相在新闻领域仍然至关重要的四点新理由：第一，真相具有预警功能：多元主体的真相共建有利于预警社会风险；第二，真相具有教育功能：培养具有怀疑精神和批判性思维的“明智公民”；第三，真相具有桥梁功能：可增进社会信任，促进公众团结；第四，真相具有限制功能：通过限制真相揭示的范围来预防“信息危害”。
In the revolutionary age of communicative abundance, the subject of truth in journalism is facing growing disputes and challenges. This dissertation stresses the “systematic” characteristic of truth, shows why truth remains important in journalism, and why it is a more complicated subject than many people suppose. Through semi-structured interviews with 32 scholars and journalists worldwide, and fieldwork including four platforms comprising different ownership models in China, Australia and Europe, this dissertation explores the role of truth in journalism in a globalized context. It centrally addresses three key questions: What does truth mean in journalism? Why we need truth in journalism? How is truth better pursued in journalism? The dissertation uses several different ideas of truth, including those of Karl Popper, Richard Rorty, Gianni Vattimo and Karl Marx, to highlight and make sense of the four different media platforms and summaries four models concerning journalism and truth: the “falsification model” (Yidianzixun Rumor Refutation Algorithm); the “pragmatic public service model” (Australian RMIT ABC Fact Check); the “dialogue-interpretation model” (Dutch independent news organization De Correspondent); and the “social harmony-practice model” (People’s Daily Qiu Zheng Column). The common ground shared by the four modes is that they all understand truth from a critical point of view, oppose the given nature and absoluteness of objective truth. The whole approach calls into question simplistic ideas about truth as well as the dogmas and prejudices upon which they are based. The dissertation argues that truth in journalism is a context-based, complicated and multi-dimensional matter marked by historical contingencies and geographical differences. The dissertation casts doubt on the orthodox “objectivity” principle and “correspondence theory of truth” in journalism. It shows that the Greek idea of truth as “aletheia” and the related ideas of “openness” and “transparency” are more conducive to building trust between media platforms and their publics and winning agreement about what counts as truth. The dissertation criticizes the dogma which supposes that truth in journalism is merely epistemological, instead arguing that truth is also an axiological and practical matter. The dissertation is especially concerned to clarify Marx’s understanding of a practice-based view of truth as a strong criticism and unmasking of bourgeois ideology in support of the people. By using a Marxist view of truth to analyze the Qiu Zheng Column of People’s Daily, this dissertation criticizes the prejudice that journalism in socialist countries is only propaganda and has no concern for truth. The dissertation offers four new reasons why truth remains vitally important in the field of journalism within the background of communicative abundance: First, truth has a precautionary function: co-construction of truth by multiple subjects is conducive to issuing early warnings of social risks; Second, truth has an educational function: cultivate “wise citizens” with skepticism and critical thinking; Third, truth serves as a bridge to enhance social trust and promote public solidarity; Fourth, truth has a restricted function: guard against “information hazards” by limiting the scope of truth disclosure.
