想像的新聞自由 —從台灣媒體之現實檢討第四權理論

Abstract

本文認為過去學者所提出：「新聞自由為一憲法上獨立權利，是專屬於新聞機構的制度性基本權利，和言論自由不同。」這樣論述的時代背景已經改變，新聞自由和言論自由在現代，應該不再專屬於機構而是屬於所有人。 這樣的想法表面上看來壓抑了新聞自由或是新聞媒體。但是把新聞自由專屬於「機構」的界線拿掉，其實反擴大新聞自由的權利主體，也就是擴大了言論自由的範圍。過去新聞界除了擁有和一般大眾一樣的言論、出版自由外，論者還主張若要善盡新聞媒體報導的責任，還需享有一般大眾在言論自由上無法享有的權利。如採訪的權利、對消息來源保密的權利、較大對抗搜索狀的權利等，才能履行新聞報導的天職。 這些權利目前在台灣新聞界尚未完全爭得，未來，也不應該專屬新聞媒體，應屬於所有能夠發揮監督功能的主體。有可能是傳統的新聞媒體，也可能或是新興的網路媒體、部落客或是未來透過其他科技以各種形式發表和傳播言論的主體。也就是說，應該視言論的實質內容以及有無發揮監督功能為標準。 新聞自由的監督功能是民主社會當中重要的「看門狗」。未來法院應將「監督者」定義放得更寬。因為科技的限制，過去只有組織的專業新聞媒體有能力監督政府，但是現在全民皆可能是記者。只侷限傳統的機構型媒體享有新聞自由，已不合理。第四權理論固有其時代意義，但現在是所有人都可發揮監督政府的功能，所有人都可能是第四權。第四權不再專屬於機構，第四權理論的歷史任務告終。

After examining the performance and social function of the press in Taiwan, this thesis discovered that there is a gap between the ideal and the reality of the fourth estate theory. Based on the observation, this thesis re-examined the theory and proposed the modification. There are two major modifications. First, “freedom of the press” should not favor only the organized private business—the institutional press, due to the commercializing trend in recent decades. The press now in Taiwan is much more subject to the demands of the marketplace than before. Most of the time, the press only have to meet the expectations of the individuals or families who own them. In this situation, most of the time, to give the preferential treatment to the press means to favor specific business. Secondly, the fast growing technological, ideological, and economic forces are making it increasingly difficult to define and justify a special legally protected role for the press. Therefore the demise of the press as a legally preferred institution is possible, probable and acceptable. This thesis thus suggests that in the future when define the press the court should focus on the function rather than the form. To conclude, the fourth estate theory has losing its basis to support the press to be the only institution playing the adversary power to the government.