請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/66438
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 劉好迪(Adrian Rauchfleisch) | |
dc.contributor.author | Yueh-Chi Lu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 呂月琪 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T00:35:50Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-02-13 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2020-02-13 | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2020-02-06 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 天下雜誌 (2018) 。選議員要1500萬起跳,誰玩得起錢坑選舉大賽?取自https://topic.cw.com.tw/politicaldynasty2018/
張瑜芳 (2016) 。2014年臺北市長選舉跨媒體議題設定研究: 以柯文哲與連勝文臉書為例。臺灣大學新聞研究所學位論文。 王泰俐 (2013)。「臉書選舉」? 2012年台灣總統大選社群媒體對政治參與行為的影響。取自http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh?DocID=10198636-201303-201304300012-201304300012-1-52 黃文鈴(2014年11月29日)。柯文哲:這是一場網路主導的選戰。聯合影音。取自 https://video.udn.com/news/240184 資策會 (2017年5月1日)。八成以上台灣人愛用Facebook、Line坐穩社群網站龍頭 1人平均擁4個社群帳號 年輕人更愛YouTube和IG。資策會新聞。取自https://www.iii.org.tw/Press/NewsDtl.aspx?fm_sqno=14&nsp_sqno=1934 Aagaard, P. (2016). The Fourth Age of Political Communication: Democratic decay or the rise of phronetic political communication? Nordicum-Mediterraneum, 11(3), B6. Amazon.com Link. (n.d.). Retrieved April 19, 2019, from https://www.amazon.com/Diffusion-Innovations-5th-Everett-Rogers/dp/0743222091 Bennett, L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A New Era of Minimal Effects? The Changing Foundations of Political Communication. Journal of Communication, 58, 707–731. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00410.x Bimber, B. (2014). Digital Media in the Obama Campaigns of 2008 and 2012: Adaptation to the Personalized Political Communication Environment. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 11, 130–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2014.895691 Blumler, J. G. (2013). Guest contribution by Jay G. Blumler: “The Fourth Age of Political Communication.” Workshop on Political Communication, the Free University of Berlin. http://www.fgpk.de/en/2013/gastbeitrag-von-jay-g-blumler-the-fourth-age-of-political-communication-2/ Blumler, J. G., & Kavanugh, D. (1999). The Third Age of Political Communication: Influences and Features. Political Communication, 16(3), 209–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846099198596 Bode, L., & Vraga, E. K. (2018). Studying Politics Across Media. Political Communication, 35(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2017.1334730 Bossetta, M. (2018). The Digital Architectures of Social Media: Comparing Political Campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. Election. SAGE Journals Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(2), 471–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018763307 Bucher, T., & Helmond, A. (2018). The Affordances of Social Media Platforms. In J. Burgess, A. Marwick, & T. Poell, The SAGE Handbook of Social Media (pp. 233–253). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473984066.n14 Burgess, J., & Green, J. (2018). YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. John Wiley & Sons. Chen, B. (2018). When Elections Become Social Movements: Emerging “Citizen-Initiated” Campaigning in Taiwan. In S. Kiyohara, K. Maeshima, & D. Owen (Eds.), Internet Election Campaigns in the United States, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan (pp. 165–188). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63682-5_7 Chen, P. J., & Smith, P. J. (2010). Adoption and Use of Digital Media in Election Campaigns: Australia, Canada and New Zealand Compared. Public Communication Review, 1(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.5130/pcr.v1i1.1249 Coleman, S., & Blumler, J. G. (2009). The Internet and democratic citizenship: Theory, practice and policy. Cambridge University Press. Dalton, R., Burklin, W., & Drummond, A. (2001). Public Opinion and Direct Democracy. Journal of Democracy, 12, 141–153. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2001.0066 Eltantawy, N., & Wiest, J. B. (2011). The Arab Spring| Social Media in the Egyptian Revolution: Reconsidering Resource Mobilization Theory. International Journal of Communication, 5(0), 18. Enli, G. S., & Skogerbø, E. (2013). Personalized Campaigns in Party-Centred Politics. Information, Communication & Society, 16(5), 757–774. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.782330 Filimonov, K., Russmann, U., & Svensson, J. (2016). Picturing the Party: Instagram and Party Campaigning in the 2014 Swedish Elections. Social Media + Society, 2(3), 2056305116662179. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116662179 Freelon, D. (2017). ReCal3: Reliability for 3+ Coders—Dfreelon.org. http://dfreelon.org/utils/recalfront/recal3/ Garthwaite, C. (2008). The Role of Celebrity Endorsements in Politics: Oprah , Obama , and the 2008 Democratic Primary. Gibson, R. K., & McAllister, I. (2015). Normalising or Equalising Party Competition? Assessing the Impact of the Web on Election Campaigning. Political Studies, 63(3), 529–547. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.12107 Hirzalla, F., Zoonen, L. van, & Ridder, J. de. (2011). Internet Use and Political Participation: Reflections on the Mobilization/Normalization Controversy. The Information Society, 27(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2011.534360 Holbrook, T. M., & McClurg, S. D. (2005). The Mobilization of Core Supporters: Campaigns, Turnout, and Electoral Composition in United States Presidential Elections. American Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 689–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00149.x Howard, P. N. (2005). Deep Democracy, Thin Citizenship: The Impact of Digital Media in Political Campaign Strategy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 597, 153–170. JSTOR. Hsieh, Y.-C., & Skelton, T. (2018). Sunflowers, youthful protestors and political achievements: Lessons from Taiwan. Children’s Geographies, 16(1), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2017.1391977 Hu, Y., Manikonda, L., & Kambhampati, S. (2014, May 16). What We Instagram: A First Analysis of Instagram Photo Content and User Types. Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM14/paper/view/8118 Jenkins, H. (2017). Voices for a New Vernacular: A Forum on Digital Storytelling—Interview with Henry Jenkins. 8. Jungherr, A. (2014). Twitter in Politics: A Comprehensive Literature Review (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2865150). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2865150 Koc-Michalska, K., Lilleker, D. G., Smith, A., & Weissmann, D. (2016). The normalization of online campaigning in the web.2.0 era. European Journal of Communication, 31(3), 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116647236 Kreiss, D. (2012). Taking Our Country Back: The Crafting of Networked Politics from Howard Dean to Barack Obama. OUP USA. Ku, G., Kaid, L. L., & Pfau, M. (2003). The Impact of Web Site Campaigning on Traditional News Media and Public Information Processing. Journalism & Mass Communication, 80, 528–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900308000304 Lalancette, M., & Raynauld, V. (2017). The Power of Political Image: Justin Trudeau, Instagram, and Celebrity Politics. SAGE, American Behavioral Scientist, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217744838 Larsson, A. O. (2018). Thumbs up, thumbs down? Likes and dislikes as popularity drivers of political YouTube videos. First Monday, 23(8). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v23i8.8318 Larsson, A. O., & Moe, H. (2014). Triumph of the Underdogs? Comparing Twitter Use by Political Actors During Two Norwegian Election Campaigns: SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014559015 Lassen, D. S., & Brown, A. R. (2011). Twitter: The Electoral Connection? Social Science Computer Review, 29(4), 419–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439310382749 Lau, R. R., Sigelman, L., & Rovner, I. B. (2007). The Effects of Negative Political Campaigns: A Meta-Analytic Reassessment. The Journal of Politics, 69(4), 1176–1209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00618.x Lev-On, A., & Haleva-Amir, S. (2018). Normalizing or equalizing? Characterizing Facebook campaigning. New Media & Society, 20(2), 720–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816669160 Liebhart, K., & Bernhardt, P. (2017). Political Storytelling on Instagram: Key Aspects of Alexander Van der Bellen’s Successful 2016 Presidential Election Campaign. Media and Communication, 5(4), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v5i4.1062 Lin, L. (2019). Taiwan Digital News Report. Digital News Report. http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/survey/2019/taiwan-2019/ Margolis, M., & Resnick, D. (2000). Politics as Usual. SAGE. Miller, C. C. (2008, November 7). How Obama’s Internet Campaign Changed Politics. Bits Blog. https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/how-obamas-internet-campaign-changed-politics/ Morris, D. Z. (2016). Trump’s Digital Team Orchestrating “Three Major Voter Suppression Operations.” Fortune. http://fortune.com/2016/10/30/trump-voter-supression-operations/ Newman, M. J. (2015, December). Image and identity: Media literacy for young adult Instagram users [Text]. https://doi.org/info:doi/10.1386/vi.4.3.221_1 Nielsen, R. K., & Vaccari, C. (2013). Do People “Like” Politicians on Facebook? Not really. Large-Scale Direct Candidate-to-Voter Online Communication as an Outlier Phenomenon. International Journal of Communication, 7(0), 24. Noam, E. M. (2005). Why the Internet is bad for democracy. Communications of the ACM. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/1089107.1089138 Norris, P. (1999). Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. OUP Oxford. O’Callaghan, D., Greene, D., Conway, M., Carthy, J., & Cunningham, P. (2013). The Extreme Right Filter Bubble. ArXiv:1308.6149 [Physics]. http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.6149 O’Connell, D. (2018). #Selfie: Instagram and the United States Congress: Social Media + Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118813373 Perrin, A. (2015, October 8). Social Media Usage: 2005-2015. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/10/08/social-networking-usage-2005-2015/ Perrin, A., & Anderson, M. (2019). Share of U.S. adults using social media, including Facebook, is mostly unchanged since 2018. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/10/share-of-u-s-adults-using-social-media-including-facebook-is-mostly-unchanged-since-2018/ Rauchfleisch, A., & Metag, J. (2016). The special case of Switzerland: Swiss politicians on Twitter. 18, 2413–2431. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815586982 Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press of Glencoe. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition (5th edition). Free Press. Rogers, L. (2019). How German Politicians Used Instagram in The EU Elections. Medium. https://medium.com/better-marketing/an-analysis-of-instagram-campaigning-by-german-political-parties-during-the-ep-elections-807e1f676d53 Samuel-Azran, T., Yarchi, M., & Wolfsfeld, G. (2015). Equalization versus Normalization: Facebook and the 2013 Israeli Elections. Social Media + Society, 1(2), 2056305115605861. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115605861 Sellen, A. J., & Harper, R. H. R. (2003). The Myth of the Paperless Office. MIT Press. Shear, M. D., Haberman, M., Confessore, N., Yourish, K., Buchanan, L., & Collins, K. (2019, November 2). How Trump Reshaped the Presidency in Over 11,000 Tweets. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/11/02/us/politics/trump-twitter-presidency.html Statista. (2019). Global Instagram user age & gender distribution 2019. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/248769/age-distribution-of-worldwide-instagram-users/ Strandberg, K. (2008). Online Electoral Competition in Different Settings: A Comparative Meta-Analysis of the Research on Party Websites and Online Electoral Competition. Party Politics, 14(2), 223–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068807085891 Strandberg, K. (2013). A social media revolution or just a case of history repeating itself? The use of social media in the 2011 Finnish parliamentary elections. New Media & Society, 15(8), 1329–1347. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812470612 Sullivan, J., & Sapir, E. (2012). Nasty or Nice? Explaining Positive and Negative Campaign Behavior in Taiwan. The China Journal, 67, 149–170. https://doi.org/10.1086/665744 Susarla, A., Oh, J.-H., & Tan, Y. (2011). Social Networks and the Diffusion of User-Generated Content: Evidence from YouTube. Information Systems Research, 23(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0339 Sylvester, E. (2012). Instagram Emerges as a Political Communications Medium. The Heritage Foundation. /technology/commentary/instagram-emerges-political-communications-medium Tedesco, John. C. (2001). Issue and Strategy Agenda-Setting in the 2000 Presidential Primaries. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(12), 2048–2067. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027640121958483 The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2018). EIU Democracy Index 2018—World Democracy Report. The Economist Intelligence Unit. https://www.eiu.com/topic/democracy-index Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Sams, S. (2013). Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: The exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style. Party Politics, 19(3), 477–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068811407580 Vis, F. (2013). Twitter as a Reporting Tool for Breaking News. Digital Journalism, 1(1), 27–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2012.741316 Weisberg, Y. J., DeYoung, C. G., & Hirsh, J. B. (2011). Gender Differences in Personality across the Ten Aspects of the Big Five. Frontiers in Psychology, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00178 Williams, C. B., & Gulati, G. J. ‘Jeff.’ (2013). Social networks in political campaigns: Facebook and the congressional elections of 2006 and 2008. New Media & Society, 15(1), 52–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812457332 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/66438 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 2014年,柯文哲在台北市長選舉中以壓倒性優勢贏得選戰,他在社群媒體上的影響力獨佔鰲頭,也促使其他政治人物針對社群媒體策略進行改革。近年來,隨著小型政黨崛起、直接民主提升公民參與等現象,社群選戰的競爭越趨明顯。儘管社群媒體在選戰中的應用已被廣泛討論,臺灣學界仍缺少跨平台和跨時間的討論,特別是針對Instagram的研究,還處於起步階段。
本研究以Facebook、YouTube、Instagram作為研究平台,研究劃分為兩大部分。首先探討2009年至2019年間,第九屆立法院113位立法委員使用社群媒體的採用時間、採用狀況和成效為何?哪些指標影響政治人物的是否採用、發文頻率、使用成效?再進一步透過均衡化假設(Equalization hypothesis)/正常化假設(Equalization hypothesis)和創新擴散理論(Diffusion of Innovation Theory),探討透過社群媒體改變政治體制權力平衡的可能性?不同社群媒體在均衡化/正常化假設的傾向為何?最後,本研究聚焦Instagram在選戰期間的應用,以量化分析和人工編碼的內容分析,針對26位台北市議員在2018年臺灣地方選舉發布的543篇Instagram貼文,分析其使用策略為何?不同政黨成員的使用策略與成效有何異同?促成貼文成功的策略又是什麼? 本研究主要採用R語言進行數據蒐集、清理、量化分析。再進一步透過研究者編碼的內容分析法和迴歸分析法研究Instagram的使用策略和貼文成功指標分析。 研究結果發現,政治人物們在Facebook上的使用率接近百分之百,YouTube和Instagram的使用率則由2015年成立的小型政黨時代力量佔優勢。女性比男性更傾向於使用社交媒體。相較之下,Instagram吸引更年輕的用戶。本研究聚焦創新擴散理論與均衡/正常化假說的辯論。在三個平台中,Facebook符合均衡化假設; YouTube的高成本平台特質強化了標準化假設,Instagram符合均衡化假設。本研究追蹤2009年至2019年政治人物們對社交媒體的使用,探討Facebook從均衡化到正常化的轉變。針對Instagram,本研究藉由創新擴散模型歸納,該平台具有發展為選戰策略工具的潛能與趨勢,是剛興起的政治工具,因此本研究也對Instagram未來趨向正常化假設的可能性進行了預測。 最後觀察Instagram的使用策略發現,Instagram還沒有被策略性地作為一個動員平台。在貼文策略的十個主題分類中,最常被採用的貼文類型是「選民互動(Fan contact)」和「懇請支持(Pleae vote)」。國民黨政治人物傾向使用「背書策略(Endorsement)」,也是唯一使用「負面策略(Negative)」的政黨,然而這種方法趨於正常化假設,不符合Instagram的均衡化傾向,因此並未帶來良好的互動成效。政治人物們並沒有善用「個性化策略(Personalization)」,藉由發文凸顯他們的個人形象。另外,針對什麼策略影響貼文的愛心數?本文透過量化分析發現,「名人代言(Celebrity Endorsement)」策略是觸動貼文收到較多讀者按讚數的關鍵要素。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Taiwan, as a promising young democracy in Asia, has its particularity as a case study. In recent years, the rise of the online campaign has changed Taiwan's dynamic of politicking. Since 2014, Ko Wen-Je’s landslide victory of the mayoral election regarding social media used in the campaign has led to the reform of other politicians’ online strategies. The need for online campaigns is expected to be higher while small parties rise and the concern for superficial democracy is becoming increasingly evident. Thus, the issue of social media campaign has received considerable critical attention. However, cross-platform comparisons and longitudinal discussions have not yet to take place in Taiwanese academia. Instagram research, in particular, as an emerging field of academic research, is still in its infancy.
This study focuses on Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram and is devoted to two main parts. The first group of analyses reviews the use of social media by 113 members of the 9th Legislative Yuan from 2009 to 2019. With equalization/normalization hypothesis and diffusion of innovation theory, the study will explore the possibility to transform the power balance of the political system through online campaigns and analyze whether there is a difference between social media platforms with regard to equalization/normalization tendencies. Following, with the primary quantitative overview of Taiwanese politicians’ social media adoption and performance and the premise of more active social media employment during electoral campaign, this study will further qualitatively focus on Instagram, conducting a content analysis on 543 posts released by 26 members of Taipei council during the 2018 Taiwanese Local Election to understand political actors’ strategies and to predict the success of their Instagram postings. This study mainly adopts the R software for data acquisition, cleaning, statistical analysis and regression analysis, such as extracting the adoption time, activity and performance of social platforms, and comparing the adoption differences in different periods and the performance usage of different platforms. Then, the post strategy and success prediction of Instagram are further studied with the content analysis methods and regression analysis. This study found that politicians' adoption on Facebook has reached nearly 100%, while YouTube and Instagram adoption rates are predominated by the New Power Party, the small party founded in 2015. Women are more likely to adopt social media than men. Furthermore, there is a clear trend of Instagram’s potential as a campaign tool with adopters younger than politicians on Facebook and YouTube. This study contributes to the debates about the equalization/normalization hypothesis with the diffusion of innovation theory. Among the three platforms, Facebook is consistent with the normalization hypothesis; YouTube strengthens the normalization hypothesis, and Instagram is in line with equalization tendencies. Analyzing the use of social media by politicians within ten years, the study explains a shift from equalization to normalization on Facebook, and the future of Instagram's possibilities towards normalization tendencies are expected. Regarding Instagram content strategy, the study implies that Instagram is not yet a strategic mobilization platform. The most frequently used strategy is the call to action and fan contact. The KMT mainly adopts politicians' endorsement strategies and is the only party that uses negative strategies. This approach does not meet the platform’s equalization tendencies. Personalized usage strategies have always been considered the best style for Instagram, but politicians don’t highlight their meaningful personalities. The most striking finding is that a possible success prediction is the celebrity endorsement strategy. Finally, this study provides crucial insights into the field of political communication and visual communication, reflecting the special context of Taiwanese online campaigns. With the increasing importance of social media use for political campaigns and the rising attention of visual communication, this study has shed light on the potential of Instagram as a campaign tool. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T00:35:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-109-R06342005-1.pdf: 18907620 bytes, checksum: 9f3323166c622ac37007aa9bdbc33a31 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 ii
中文摘要 iii Abstract v List of Figures x List of Tables xi I. Introduction 1 II. Literature Review 7 2.1 Social Media and Political Communication 7 2.1.1 Equalization 13 2.1.2 Normalization 14 2.1.3 Diffusion of Innovations 16 2.1.4 Socio-demographic data as the independent variables 18 2.2 Instagram used in Politics 20 2.2.1 Instagram strategical use 21 2.3 Taiwan’s political context 24 III. Data and Methodology 28 3.1 Design 28 3.2 Data and Measurement 29 3.2.1 Cross-Platform Regression Analysis: Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram 29 3.2.2 Instagram Content Analysis: Data Collection and Coding Procedure 31 IV. Results 39 4.1 Taiwan politicians' general use of Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram 39 4.2 Longitudinal adoption on Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram 42 4.3 Performance explained: Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram 53 4.4 Instagram strategies in the 2018 Taiwan campaign 57 4.4.1 Ten content classification strategies 59 4.4.1.1 Fan contact 59 4.4.1.2 Please support 60 4.4.1.3 Mobilization 62 4.4.1.4 Negative 63 4.4.1.5 Politics 65 4.4.1.6 Politician indirect endorsement 66 4.4.1.7 Politician official endorsement 68 4.4.1.8 Celebrity indirect endorsement 69 4.4.1.9 Celebrity official endorsement 71 4.4.1.10 Personalization 72 4.5 Success prediction for Instagram strategies 75 V. Discussion 78 5.1 Hypothesis explained 78 5.2 Debates on Equalization and Normalization 82 5.2.1 Adoption 83 5.2.1.1 Facebook: from equalization to normalization 83 5.2.1.2 Instagram: equalization tendencies 84 5.2.2 Performance 85 5.2.2.1 Facebook performance: equalization 85 5.2.2.2 YouTube for agenda-setting: normalization tendencies 86 5.2.2.3 Instagram performance: equalization 88 5.2.3 Instagram as a campaign tool 90 5.2.3.1 Instagram as a mobilization platform 91 5.2.3.2 KMT’s reform in 2018 92 5.2.3.3 Personalization strategy 94 5.2.3.4 Success prediction: Celebrity indirect endorsement 95 VI. Outlook 97 VII. Reference 99 VIII. Appendices 108 Appendix A. Quantification of image types for 543 posts 108 Appendix B. Images type of 543 posts by parties 109 Appendix C. Data: 113 members of 9th Legislative Yuan 110 Appendix D. Data: 63 members of Taipei council 114 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | "誰是社群選戰贏家?Facebook, YouTube, Instagram 跨平台分析" | zh_TW |
dc.title | Analyzing Taiwanese Politicians’ Social Media Adoption On Facebook, YouTube, And Instagram. | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 108-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 謝吉隆(Ji-Lung Hsieh),許詩嫺(Shih-Hsien Hsu) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 政治傳播,均衡化,正常化,創新擴散理論,Facebook,YouTube,Instagram,社群媒體,內容分析,選戰, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | political communication,equalization,normalization,diffusion of innovations,Facebook,YouTube,Instagram,Taiwan,social media, | en |
dc.relation.page | 115 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202000234 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2020-02-07 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 新聞研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 新聞研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-109-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 18.46 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。