國立高雄大學圖資館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

圖資館首頁

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

跟拍採訪之基本權利衝突 = Research of The Fundam...

國立高雄大學法律學系碩士班

跟拍採訪之基本權利衝突 = Research of The Fundamental Rights Conflict within The Stalking Interview

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : 單行本
並列題名:	Research of The Fundamental Rights Conflict within The Stalking Interview
作者:	藍宗煌,
其他團體作者:	國立高雄大學
出版地:	[高雄市]
出版者:	撰者;
出版年:	2013[民102]
面頁冊數:	174面圖，表格 : 30公分;
標題:	跟拍採訪
標題:	stalking
電子資源:	http://handle.ncl.edu.tw/11296/ndltd/67940480775584695187
附註:	參考書目：面157-165
附註:	102年10月31日公開
摘要註:	轉述、傳播一個事件、一個現象，甚至是一個觀點，千言萬語的翔實描述，往往不如相片、短片等影音資料搭配簡單說明來得有說服力。在媒體高度競爭的當代，精彩影音與文字的搭配呈現，是一種必然的形式。這時候影音資料的素材哪裡來？來自於報導事件相關當事人的採訪和以第三人稱的角度拍攝，最貼近事實，也最能取信讀者，讓閱讀的大眾也能身歷其境的掌握現場第一手畫面。或者基於天性，人人都有多知道一點他人的事的慾望，但卻又極盡防衛手段的防止他人探索自己的隱私，形成一種相當弔詭的反差，這種情況在一般民眾，後者的困擾或許感受並不深，畢竟毫無新聞價值，但當情形換成是公眾人物，衝突於是產生。解決衝突方法，或者說防止衝突所劃出的界限應該在哪？往往「公共利益」都被拿出來當作答案，但公共利益究竟是什麼？高度的不確定性帶來的無非就是不安定的操作標準，大法官在司法院釋字第689號解釋嘗試以「公益性」、「大眾所關切」、「社會通念」等詞加以替代，但仍難以為吾人所接受，因此本文將深入分析衝突現場當事人的利與害，嘗試提出更具體的操作標準，使跟拍者、被跟拍者，甚至負責裁罰的警方，能有清楚的界限認知。各方都能清楚的認知界限在哪裡，本文以為這才是解決衝突的根本，否則一旦標準浮動，各有各的認知，衝突將層出不窮。文中除了分析跟拍採訪自由及其上位新聞自由的理論實務現狀，也將嘗試對隱私權的概念作對應的微調，使源自於住家界限範圍的隱私權，拉到公共場域也能有所發揮。而調和基本權利衝突，除了理論的介紹、利弊的分析，也將提出卡洛琳公主案在德國聯邦憲法法院、歐洲人權法院判決產生的不同意見、價值取捨，作為本文論證的驗證實例。 Today, when reporting news, using just words, even a lot of words is not as powerful as using a combination of photo, film, sound and words. The most convincing material comes from either witnesses or from the reporter allowing for the audience to experience it personally as if the situation happened to them. By nature humans are curious as to how others live while at the same time trying to protect their own privacy thereby creating a paradox given that we are curious as to how famous people live their lives.A paradox is created as we try to protect our own privacy but we want to know more about other people. As a news agency the question becomes what do people need to know about famous celebrities and the lines between right to privacy of an individual and freedom of speech is blurred. Public interest usually be the line/boundary to avoid or resolve conflicts, but what it would be? High uncertainty brings unstable operation standards. J. Y. Interpretation No. 689 tries to use public welfare, care by public, or social common concept to replace public interest, but is still unable to define a clear boundary between the two. Therefore this thesis will further analyze an individual’s right to privacy and freedom of speech by analyzing the pros and cons of both rights and create a standard guideline that will protect all rights without invading the privacy the individual.Besides of analysis to theory and practical status of press freedom, this thesis also tries to adjust the concept of privacy, to extend the applicable range from personal space to public area. The different opinions and values in the judgment of Princess Caroline case in Germany Federal Court of Constitution and European Court of Human Rights, provide the proved example for this thesis.

跟拍採訪之基本權利衝突 = Research of The Fundamental Rights Conflict within The Stalking Interview
藍, 宗煌

跟拍採訪之基本權利衝突 = Research of The Fundamental Rights Conflict within The Stalking Interview / 藍宗煌撰 - [高雄市] : 撰者, 2013[民102]. - 174面 ; 圖，表格 ; 30公分.
參考書目：面157-165102年10月31日公開.
跟拍採訪stalking

跟拍採訪之基本權利衝突 = Research of The Fundamental Rights Conflict within The Stalking Interview
LDR:05062nam0a2200289 450 001 389545
005 20170214100013.0
009 389545
010 0 $b 精裝
010 0 $b 平裝
100 $a 20170214d2013 k y0chiy05 e
101 1 $a chi $d chi $d eng
102 $a tw
105 $a ak am 000yy
200 1 $a 跟拍採訪之基本權利衝突 $d Research of The Fundamental Rights Conflict within The Stalking Interview $z eng $f 藍宗煌撰
210 $a [高雄市] $c 撰者 $d 2013[民102]
215 0 $a 174面 $c 圖，表格 $d 30公分
300 $a 參考書目：面157-165
300 $a 102年10月31日公開
314 $a 指導教授：張永明
328 $a 碩士論文--國立高雄大學法律學系碩士班
330 $a 轉述、傳播一個事件、一個現象，甚至是一個觀點，千言萬語的翔實描述，往往不如相片、短片等影音資料搭配簡單說明來得有說服力。在媒體高度競爭的當代，精彩影音與文字的搭配呈現，是一種必然的形式。這時候影音資料的素材哪裡來？來自於報導事件相關當事人的採訪和以第三人稱的角度拍攝，最貼近事實，也最能取信讀者，讓閱讀的大眾也能身歷其境的掌握現場第一手畫面。或者基於天性，人人都有多知道一點他人的事的慾望，但卻又極盡防衛手段的防止他人探索自己的隱私，形成一種相當弔詭的反差，這種情況在一般民眾，後者的困擾或許感受並不深，畢竟毫無新聞價值，但當情形換成是公眾人物，衝突於是產生。解決衝突方法，或者說防止衝突所劃出的界限應該在哪？往往「公共利益」都被拿出來當作答案，但公共利益究竟是什麼？高度的不確定性帶來的無非就是不安定的操作標準，大法官在司法院釋字第689號解釋嘗試以「公益性」、「大眾所關切」、「社會通念」等詞加以替代，但仍難以為吾人所接受，因此本文將深入分析衝突現場當事人的利與害，嘗試提出更具體的操作標準，使跟拍者、被跟拍者，甚至負責裁罰的警方，能有清楚的界限認知。各方都能清楚的認知界限在哪裡，本文以為這才是解決衝突的根本，否則一旦標準浮動，各有各的認知，衝突將層出不窮。文中除了分析跟拍採訪自由及其上位新聞自由的理論實務現狀，也將嘗試對隱私權的概念作對應的微調，使源自於住家界限範圍的隱私權，拉到公共場域也能有所發揮。而調和基本權利衝突，除了理論的介紹、利弊的分析，也將提出卡洛琳公主案在德國聯邦憲法法院、歐洲人權法院判決產生的不同意見、價值取捨，作為本文論證的驗證實例。 Today, when reporting news, using just words, even a lot of words is not as powerful as using a combination of photo, film, sound and words. The most convincing material comes from either witnesses or from the reporter allowing for the audience to experience it personally as if the situation happened to them. By nature humans are curious as to how others live while at the same time trying to protect their own privacy thereby creating a paradox given that we are curious as to how famous people live their lives.A paradox is created as we try to protect our own privacy but we want to know more about other people. As a news agency the question becomes what do people need to know about famous celebrities and the lines between right to privacy of an individual and freedom of speech is blurred. Public interest usually be the line/boundary to avoid or resolve conflicts, but what it would be? High uncertainty brings unstable operation standards. J. Y. Interpretation No. 689 tries to use public welfare, care by public, or social common concept to replace public interest, but is still unable to define a clear boundary between the two. Therefore this thesis will further analyze an individual’s right to privacy and freedom of speech by analyzing the pros and cons of both rights and create a standard guideline that will protect all rights without invading the privacy the individual.Besides of analysis to theory and practical status of press freedom, this thesis also tries to adjust the concept of privacy, to extend the applicable range from personal space to public area. The different opinions and values in the judgment of Princess Caroline case in Germany Federal Court of Constitution and European Court of Human Rights, provide the proved example for this thesis.
510 1 $a Research of The Fundamental Rights Conflict within The Stalking Interview $z eng
610 0 $a 跟拍採訪 $a 新聞自由 $a 言論自由 $a 公眾人物 $a 公共場域 $a 隱私權 $a 基本權衝突
610 1 $a stalking $a freedom of press $a freedom of speech $a public figure $a public area $a right of privacy $a conflict of constitutional rights
681 $a 008M/0019 $b 380101 4439 $v 2007年版
700 1 $a 藍 $b 宗煌 $4 撰 $3 614422
712 0 2 $a 國立高雄大學 $b 法律學系碩士班 $3 166036
801 0 $a tw $b NUK $c 20131021 $g CCR
856 7 $z 電子資源 $2 http $u http://handle.ncl.edu.tw/11296/ndltd/67940480775584695187