修辞学视角下的食品安全风险交流——以方舟子崔永元转基因之争为例  

Food Safety Risk Communication from the Rhetoric Perspective:Taking the Example of the Debates between Fang Zhouzi and Cui Yongyuanon Genetically Modified Food

作　　者：范敏[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京工商大学艺术与传媒学院新闻系

出　　处：《国际新闻界》2016年第6期97-109,共13页Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication

基　　金：北京市教委2015年度社科计划重点项目"北京市突发公共事件中的主流媒体运用与舆论引导策略研究"(项目编号SZ201510011006);北京工商大学科研基地建设-科技创新平台-新媒体环境下食品安全信息传播中的新闻报道与舆论监督研究(项目编号PXM2015_014213_000038)的阶段性成果~~

摘　　要：食品安全风险交流关注度高、专业性强、各方利益诉求驳杂,有其特殊的语境,在这个语境中"说话"必须选择适切的语体才能有助于达成有效防控风险的效果。方舟子、崔永元围绕转基因问题展开的食品安全风险交流在身份定位、说服论证、话轮交替、语用风格诸方面采取的修辞策略迥异。作为一名科普者,方舟子在逻辑推理的科学性和语言表达的条理性方面表现优异,却没有在民调中赢得支持,修辞层面的原因在于没有充分认识语体与语境适配的重要性,其失误源于以下三个方面的误判:1、把交流对象预设成科学圈内人而非公众;2、把交流目的变成压倒辩手而非与公众沟通;3、把交流等同于推理论证而忽视了德性、善意,以及对公众情绪的感知。Food safety risk communication has its special context in which every speaker should choose proper language style so as to manage the possible risk of misunderstanding. Fang Zhouzi and Cui Yongyuan took a different rhetoric strategy during their debates on genetically modified food in the following aspects： identity positioning, persuasion, turn-taking control, pragmatic style. Fang Zhouzi did much better in the logic reasoning and logical expression than Cui Yongyuan but surprisingly he failed in the opinion polls. The failure lies in his ignorance of the suitability of language style and the context. In detail, he made three mistakes： 1. messed up the communication object of the public with the scientific insider; 2. pursued wrong communication purpose for overwhelming the opponent rather than communicating with the public; 3. simply equaled the communication as reasoning argument thus ignoring the virtue, goodwill and perception of the public mood.

关 键 词：食品安全风险交流 修辞学 方舟子 崔永元 

分 类 号：TS201.6[轻工技术与工程—食品科学] H15[轻工技术与工程—食品科学与工程]