李金銓於1980 年出版英文專著《媒介帝國主義再商榷》。在當時資訊自由流通與文化帝國主義論辯對峙下，李金銓主張兩方說法各自成理，卻也各有偏差。他強調理論上折衷取兩方之優，但證據先行，應對各國的傳統與現狀，以及內、外條件作個案的綜合分析，並主張第三世界國家應該自主構畫傳播政策。本文取徑薩依德（Edward Said）的對位解讀，聚焦李金銓關於資訊流通與個案複雜性的相關討論。對照相隔了四十多年後，當前全球資訊流通現狀，本文探討李金銓早期的立場，如何一定程度上仍起燭照現狀的作用。

In 1980, Chin-Chuan Lee published his first book Media Imperialism Reconsidered: The Homogenization of Television Culture. In the wake of the debate between the liberal-pluralist’s rhetoric of “free flow of information” and the Neo-Marxist assertion of cultural imperialism, Lee proposed a middle way solution, unveiling the fallacies of both perspectives while seeking for a proper synthesis of their benefits. He suggests that the media imperialism thesis be empirically built upon verifiable indicators. And a creative synthesis of policies weighing internal dynamics against external constraints, convention with the status-quo, is key for the Third-World nations to control their own media destiny. The article focuses on Lee’s discussion of information flow and complexity. By way of contrapuntal reading created by Edward Said, the article reviews Lee’s argument, raised forty years ago, against the current conditions of global information flows. It argues that Lee’s initial refusal to “take side” theoretically and his recognition of case complexity has, to a great extent, cast light on the status quo of information dis/orders.