本論文共分五章。第一章為緒論，包括研究問題、研究動機與研究意義。研究問題在探詢「二二八事件」當時台灣主要官方報紙《台灣新生報》呈現了什麼觀點、其言論立場的轉變的原因為何？此轉變對日後台灣媒體論述有什麼影響？研究動機主要想瞭解「二二八事件」期間《台灣新生報》言論立場轉變之原因，進而反省當今媒體意識形態問題，藉以瞭解國民黨意識形態如何運用媒體形塑文化霸權論述。同時說明「二二八事件」與《台灣新生報》的研究意義與價值。 第二章為文獻回顧與理論探討，首先回顧「二二八事件」的相關研究，並藉由與文獻對話的過程體現研究者對「二二八事件」的論述觀點。理論的部分則在檢視葛蘭西的「文化霸權」理論，思索身為國家意識形態機器的《台灣新生報》在事件期間的角色與其報導論述之取向。 第三章觀察《台灣新生報》文本在「二二八事件」期間的論述立場、報導題材與版面處理的變化，瞭解在政府介入下該報霸權論述的形塑過程。 第四章進一步探究《台灣新生報》文本內容，指出該報在特定意識形態力量召喚下所呈現出的幾種霸權論述樣貌。 第五章為結論，說明《台灣新生報》霸權論述的意義，指出國民黨的意識形態霸權對台灣媒體論述的影響，反思當前台灣媒體諸問題。 / This thesis is divided into five chapters. It starts, in “Introduction,” with the explanation of the author’s problem, motivation and the significance of this study. For a start, the problem is to find out what kinds of news were represented and why its remarks had transformed Taiwan Shin Sheng Daily News（hereafter TSSDN）, Taiwan’s major publicly-owned newspaper at that time, on its viewpoints of the Feb.28 Incident. In addition, questions are asked about how this change has made an impact on Taiwan media accounts and remarks. Secondly, the motivation is mainly to understand why TSSDN altered its statement and remarks during the Feb.28 Incident. In observing this change, the author tries to discover how KMT ideology took advantage of the media and formed its hegemony as a reminder of present-day media ideological problems in Taiwan. At the same time, the researcher manifests the meaning and value of this thesis. The second chapter deals with“literature review”and“theory probing.”To begin with, the author reviews studies regarding the Feb.28 Incident and makes clear his own view on the Incident by means of a dialogue with the literature. Moreover, by inspecting Gramsci’s hegemony theory, the author ponders on TSSDN’s role as the Ideological State Apparatus and its accounts of the incident In the third chapter, the author scrutinizes TSSDN’s discourse to find out its perspective, accounts and layouts during the Feb.28 Incident in an attempt to understand the progress of TSSDN’s discursive hegemony built in the era of government intervention. In the fourth chapter, the author probes further into TSSDN’s discourse to identify several patterns under the summons of the specific ideology. In the concluding chapter, by interpreting the meaning of TSSDN’s hegemony discussion, the author points out the influence of KMT’s ideological hegemony on Taiwan media remarks and introspects on current problems of Taiwan media.