IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bdz/ssosch/v4y2025i4p23-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of the Aphasia Phenomenon of New Mainstream Media — A Case Study of Gou Jing in Shandong

Author

Listed:
  • Shurui Liu

    (School of Journalism and New Media, Xi’an Jiaotong University, China)

Abstract

This paper takes the Gou Jing incident in Shandong as the research object to explore the aphasia phenomenon of new mainstream media in hot events and the resulting media ethics anomie. By analyzing the phenomena of information distortion, public opinion reversal and collective silence of the media in the process of event communication, it reveals the structural dilemmas existing in the current media ecology: some media abandon fact-checking in pursuit of traffic, leading to public cognitive bias; the delayed voice of authoritative media has exacerbated the division of the public opinion field; the unbalanced reports driven by economic interests have damaged the foundation of social justice. The study points out that the anomie of media ethics not only weakens the credibility of the media and distorts the audience’s cognition, but also may cause social order chaos. In response to these problems, this paper puts forward three countermeasures: strengthening the professional quality of media personnel, purifying the internal atmosphere of the industry, and promoting the “era-adaptive” transformation of investigative reports. The research shows that reconstructing a healthy media ethics system requires the collaboration of media, the public and institutions to reshape the rational foundation of the public discourse space.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:bdz:ssosch:v:4:y:2025:i:4:p:23-31
DOI: 10.63593/SSSH.2709-7862.2025.07.004
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.paradigmpress.org/SSSH/article/view/1711/1539
Download Restriction: no

File URL: https://libkey.io/10.63593/SSSH.2709-7862.2025.07.004?utm_source=ideas
LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
---><---

More about this item

Keywords

;
;
;
;

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bdz:ssosch:v:4:y:2025:i:4:p:23-31. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.paradigmpress.org/ .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.