本研究以2010年富士康連續墜樓事件作為觀察對象，採用新聞框架理論，檢視國內報紙對於勞工議題的報導。另鑑於本事件為台商在中國投資的事件，牽動敏感的兩岸話題，因此本研究加入各報政治偏差之因素，探討國內報紙對該事件報導的異同。 研究發現，事件發生初期，國內報紙多以「責任框架」報導，追究雇主應負的責任與提出的解決辦法；到了中後期，各報則以「經濟影響框架」為主，探討加薪將對雇主、國家，乃至全球經濟造成的影響。各報報導立場雖多為中立，但仍可見媒體對雇主的立場出現由負轉正的趨勢。此外，無論是「責任框架」或是「經濟影響框架」，在本事件勞工議題的討論中，雇主佔去了大部分的發言權，反觀以勞工為主體性的文章，則是少之又少。 政治立場偏藍的報紙，如«聯合報»和«中國時報»，皆以廣大篇幅報導之；反之，政治立場偏綠的報紙，如«自由時報»，則企圖淡化該新聞；而市場導向的«蘋果日報»位於兩者中間。所有報紙的報導皆以雇主發言為大宗，勞工仍處於弱勢，至於新聞框架的使用，則無明顯政黨偏差。 / This thesis examines the frames used in the news coverage of the Foxconn suicide jumps in general and labor issue in particular, along with political affiliation as a factor in Taiwan’s dailies. Framing analysis of 222 articles in the four major newspapers in Taiwan showed that “attribution of responsibility” and “economic consequence” were identified to be the two most used frames in coverage. These frames shifted to one another on June 1, the day when the company announced the wage increase policy. After the time divide, stories published before that mainly talked about attribution of responsibility and soon shifted to economic consequence afterwards. As for tone, coverage of workers generally stayed neutral with a subtle change from positive to negative, while stories of employers showed a shift from negative in the beginning to positive in the later stage. In terms of political affiliation, findings showed that difference could be obviously observed in the quantity of coverage, where the pro-Green Liberty Times contributed much less than the pro-Blue United Daily and China Times. While showing no obvious difference in the use of frame and by tone in the four newspapers when describing workers and employers, the pro-independence Liberty Times demonstrated apparent negative attitude toward the Chinese government and other China-related affairs in its editorials.