廣告具有微觀經濟的功能，但與宏觀經濟的成長與否，關係不大，惟廣告作為商業傳媒的主要收入來源，另有重要意義，它是傳媒性格產生質變的關鍵因素。從此，傳媒先是服務廣告主，若有餘力，才是閱聽人；並且，傳媒偏向、縱容與鼓動部分閱聽人的部分欲求，漠視閱聽人的其他需要。這個違反民主的結果有待糾正，本文因此介紹英語世界中，鑽研廣告與傳媒歷史最有成績的柯蘭，以及討論廣告財政改革最力的貝克，切入點是有關平衡報業財政來源的構思、推理與比較。其次，本文評估廣告財政規範與改革的實踐及其成績，對象是若干歐洲國家、日本、南韓及中國，檢視的核心傳媒是報紙，但也納入廣電與影視廣告財政的規範。由於瑞典的報業補助系統歷史較久而規模較大，且其補助資金的來源與效果獨步全球，我們是以對瑞典有更為詳細的鋪陳。除了重新分配廣告收入，文末指出，創設或擴大不必依靠廣告收入的公共服務媒體，是另一個政策選擇，且可能更為重要。 Advertising has its role to play in micro-economic operations, and yet has little to do with economic growth. The significance of advertising lies in the fact that, as income of the commercial mass media become dependent upon advertising, its political nature is transformed. Subsequently, the media exists to serve the advertisers, while catering to the audience wherever it sees fit. Further, the advertising-financed media is biased towards certain audience’s wants, its needs are discarded or marginalized. This is an undemocratic outcome and needs correction, therefore this article introduces and discusses ideas and proposals of two most renounced scholars, James Curran and Edwin Baker, working on advertising-related history and policy issues. It is followed by an examination of policy practices carried out in some European countries, mostly on advertising finances and the press subsidy, but extended to a smaller extent to the audio-visual sector. Related practices in Japan, South Korea and China are assessed as well. Sweden is singled out to receive a closer examination as her policy towards subsidizing the press has been unique among the rank. The author concludes by suggesting that constructing or expanding the public service media, without advertising finance, may be a more significant and fruitful policy option, in parallel to a redistribution of advertising revenues.
