本文檢視台灣2004年總統大選爭議後的電視政論節目，以「真調會覆 議案大法官關說疑雲」為例，利用符號文本分析的方式，探討台灣特定社 會脈絡中政論節目的議題論述策略，辨識其中的議題框架。研究發現， Bourdieu的「戲劇化」、「強制世界觀」等說法，不足以精確描述台灣政 論節目的狀態；政論節目呈現出「台灣藍綠政黨對決連續劇」，不約而同 使用「策略框架」的競逐現象。最後，本文針對台灣政論節目的問題，討 論媒體責任並提出法規改善建議。

The present study examines the political talk shows after the controversy of Taiwan presidential election in 2004. Taking “the suspicious case of Grand Justice’s lobbying for the reconsideration of the Truth Investigation Committee Statute” as an example, the study uses textual analysis to probe into political talk shows within the specific social context and discusses the discourse strategies of the political talk shows. In addition, the study applies framing theories to identify frame strategies used by guests in the discursive process. The study finds that Pierre Bourdieu’s notions of “dramatisation” and “vision du monde” cannot adequately depict Taiwan’s political talk shows. Nonetheless, these political talk shows, failing to function as a public sphere, present themselves together as “the TV series of blue-green party conflicts in Taiwan” regardless of varied topics and issues in programs. Although their stances are distinctly different, both party members use “strategy frames” when engaged in the political discourse. Finally, the paper reflects on both the media responsibility and media law in order to provide suggestions of improving the television political talk shows in Taiwan.