2022年8月，美國眾議院長南西．裴洛西訪台與立法院副院長進行會談，該場會談採以網路直播的方式播送，包括逐步口譯。而該場會談的口譯員因為頻頻打斷裴洛西發言和多次笑出聲招致網民留言批評。
本研究以此真實素材為軸，以質性研究中的個案分析與深度訪談法，結合152則網路留言與八位擁有相關經驗的專業口譯員之觀點，探討媒體直播政治類口譯的特色與評價標準。根據直播平台上的網民留言分析，網民對於此次會談中口譯員的非語言行為最為反感，且在留言中有半數以上為負面評價，另一方面受訪的專業口譯員卻持不同觀點，認為以專業口譯品質評量標準來看，該口譯員盡責且專業，只是媒體直播政治類口譯本來就風險比較高，因為大場面、高曝光度和即時性，口譯員的言行較容易受到網民放大檢視與批評。
綜合雙方觀點，研究結果顯示媒體直播政治類口譯確實有其特殊性，使用者在意的面向與過往其他口譯形式不同，而受訪口譯員也根據經驗找出應對的策略以及面對評價的看法，兩者的論點皆可供口譯教育機構作為規劃專門課程的參考。

Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, visited the Taiwanese legislature in August 2022. During her visiting remark, which was live-streamed online along with consecutive interpretation, the interpreter's performance sparked backlash among internet users. They criticized her for behaviors deemed unprofessional, such as interrupting Pelosi and laughing audibly.
This incident presents a distinctive opportunity to compare the perspectives of 152 online commentators and eight experienced professional interpreters. Through the utilization of a case study approach and semi-structured interviews, the study revealed that online users were primarily concerned with the interpreter's non-verbal behaviors, with a majority of negative comments. In contrast, professional interpreters interviewed for this research largely disagreed with these opinions. They viewed the interpreter's conduct as responsible and professional. The heightened significance of the specific interpreting task arose from its association with significant events, extensive exposure, and the immediacy inherent in live broadcast diplomatic interpreting, thereby elevating the stakes. Consequently, the interpreter's every utterance and action was subject to heightened scrutiny and criticism from online users.
This comparative analysis underscores that live broadcasted diplomatic interpreting is a distinct context, warranting separate discussion. Online users applied quality standards differing from traditional interpreting norms, while professional interpreters developed specific strategies to navigate these unique challenges and public perceptions. The insights gained from this study are valuable, offering potential implications for the refinement of interpreter training programs in the future.

中廣新聞網（2022年4月30日）。影／美議員要蔡英文「買波音787」 口譯、新聞稿刻意消失。中國廣播電台。取自：https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E5%BD%B1-%E7%BE%8E%E8%AD%B0%E5%93%A1%E8%A6%81%E8%94%A1%E8%8B%B1%E6%96%87-%E8%B2%B7%E6%B3%A2%E9%9F%B3787-%E5%8F%A3%E8%AD%AF-%E6%96%B0%E8%81%9E%E7%A8%BF%E5%88%BB%E6%84%8F%E6%B6%88%E5%A4%B1-191533892.html
石辰盈（2004）。電視新聞口譯情境研究：新聞主管及觀眾觀點（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
孔令信（2016）。318學運帶動的媒體革命—夾角拖與iPad網路直播模式的反思。傳播研究與實踐6（1），229-250。
汝明麗（1996）。從使用者觀點探討口譯品質與口譯員之角色（未出版之碩士論文）。輔仁大學，新北市。
邱祐寧（2022年8月2日）。選在敏感時機訪台！一文搞懂裴洛西是誰，為何要來？遠見。取自https://www.gvm.com.tw/article/92667
吳寧康（2023年4月7日）。美中經濟主戰場：一場無煙硝的晶片大戰。中央廣播電台。取自https://www.rti.org.tw/news/view/id/2164219
范安祈（2020年1月13日）。小英勝選記者會「張鈞甯」幫翻譯？學霸背景遭起底。TVBS。取自https://news.tvbs.com.tw/entertainment/1262296
孫雅玲、劉敏華（2004）。同步口譯的口語特性與電視新聞閱聽感受及收看意願的關聯。新文學研究81，43-83。
張如嫻（2021）。金魚缸裡的隱形風暴：疫情直播記者會下，新聞工作的挑戰與突圍（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣大學，台北市。
張柏仲（2022年5月22日）。影／美參議員2枚胸針意義深遠 江啟臣批總統府翻譯「輕描淡寫」。中國廣播電台。取自https://bccnews.com.tw/archives/234256
楊承淑（2000）。口譯教學研究：理論與實踐。新北市：輔仁大學。
廖幸嫻（2005）。電視口譯品質與訓練之探討：從業人員觀點（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
潘淑滿（2022）。質性研究：理論於應用。台北市：心裡出版社。
賴明弘、張峻維（2016）。網路影音直播平台的使用者行為探討：從知曉到持續使用。中科大學報3（1），31-48。
Ais, A.C. & Becerra, O.G. (2015). Quality. In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, Holly Mikkelson & Renee Jourdenais (ed.), 368-383. New York: Routledge.
Angelelli, C. V. (2015). Invisibility. Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, Franz Pöchhacker (ed.), 214-215. Routledge.
Bancroft, M. A. (2015). Community interpreting. In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, Holly Mikkelson & Renee Jourdenais (ed.), 217-235. New York: Routledge.
Baranyani, T. (2001). The role of translation and interpretation in the diplomatic communication. SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation, 5(2).
Boeri, J. (2015). Key internal players in the development of the interpreting profession. The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, Holly Mikkelson & Renee Jourdenais (ed.), 29-44. New York: Routledge.
Boot, A. B., Dijkstra, K., & Zwaan, R. A. (2021). The processing and evaluation of news content on social media is influenced by peer-user commentary. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8, article 209.
Bühler, H. (1986). Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of Conference Interpretation and Interpreters. Multilingua, 5(4), 231-235.
Buri, M. R. (2015). Interpreting in diplomatic settings. Accessed September 2023, from AIIC- International Association of Conference Interpreters: https://aiic.net/p/7349.
Castillo, P. (2015). Interpreting for the mass media. The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, Holly Mikkelson & Renee Jourdenais (ed.), 280-301. Routledge.
Chen, S., Shechter, D., & Chaiken, S. (1996). Getting at the truth or getting along: accuracy- versus impression- motivated heuristic and systematic processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 262-275.
Chiaro, D. & Nocella, G. (2004) Interpreters’ Perception of Linguistic and Non-Linguistic Factors Affecting Quality. Meta, 49(2), 278-293.
Dal Fovo. E. (2015). Media interpreting. Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, Franz Pöchhacker (ed.), 245-247. Routledge.
Dam, H. V. (2017). Interpreter role, ethics, and norms. In The Changing Role of the Interpreter, Marta Biagini, Michael S. Boyd, Claudia Monacelli (ed.), 228-239. Routledge.
Diriker, E. (2009). Meta-discourse as a source for exploring the professional image(s) of conference interpreters. HERMES - Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 22(42), 71–91.
Diriker, E. (2015). Conference interpreting. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, Franz Pöchhacker (ed.). New York: Routledge.
Fan, C. D. (2021). Interpreting in a high-stake political press conference: A technical report. Studies of Translation and Interpretation, 24, 123-148.
Fu, R. (2018). Translating like a conduit? A sociosemiotic analysis of modality in Chinese government press conference interpreting. Semiotica, 221, 175-198.
Galvao, E. Z. & Rodrigues, I. G. 2015. Nonverbal communication. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, Franz Pöchhacker (ed.), 280-281. Routledge.
Garcia-Beyaert, S. (2015). Key external players in the development of the interpreting profession. In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, Holly Mikkelson & Renee Jourdenais (ed.) Routledge.
Garzone, G. (2002). Quality and norms in interpretation. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, Giuliana Garzone & Maurizio Viezze (ed.), 117-130. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gu, C. (2019). Interpreters caught up in an ideological tug-of-war? A CDA and Bakhtinian analysis of interpreters' ideological positioning and alignment at government press conferences. Translation and interpreting studies, 14(1), 1-20.
Jiang, L. et al. (2014). The sociological turn in the interpreter’s role. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 9(2), 274-298.
Kadrić, M., Rennert, S., & Schäffner, C. (2022). Diplomatic and political interpreting explained. Oxon & New York: Routledge.
Kurz, I. (1988). Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 5, 13-21.
Kurz, I. (2002). Physiological stress responses during media and conference interpreting. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, Giuliana Garzone & Maurizio Viezze (ed.), 195-202. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Liao, S. & Pan, L. (2018). Interpreter mediation at political press conferences: A narrative account. Interpreting, 20(2), 188-203.
Lin, S. (2015). Exploring social media users’ perception of interpreting quality. [Unpublished master thesis]. National Taiwan University.
Llewellyn-Jones, P. & Lee, R. G. (2009). The ‘role’ of the community/ public service interpreter. Paper presented at the Supporting Deaf People Online Conference. Retrieved from http://www.online-conference.net/sdp2009.htm
Mack, G. (2002). New perspectives and challenges for interpretation: The example of television. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, Giuliana Garzone & Maurizio Viezze (ed.), 203-213. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Martínez-Gómez, A. (2015). Invisible, visible or everywhere in between? Perceptions and actual behaviors of non-professional interpreters and interpreting users. The Interpreters' Newsletter, 20, 175-194.
McKee, R. L. (2008). ‘Quality’ in interpreting: A survey of practitioner perspectives. The Sign Language Translator and Interpreter, 2(1), 1-14.
Pöchhacker, F. (2010). Media Interpreting. In Handbook of Translation Studies, Yves Gambier & Luc van Doorslaer (ed.), 204-206. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Pöchhacker, F. & Zwischenberger, C. (2010). Survey on quality and role: Conference interpreters’ expectations and self-perceptions. Accessed September 2023, from AIIC- International Association of Conference Interpreters: https://aiic.org/document/9646/
Pöchhacker, F. (2011). Researching TV interpreting: Selected studies of US presidential material. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 16, 21-36.
Setton, R. & Dawrant, A. (2016a). Conference interpreting: A Complete Course. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Setton, R. & Dawrant, A. (2016b). Conference interpreting: A Trainer’s Guide. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Setton, R. & Guo, A. L. (2009). Attitudes to roles, status, and professional identity in interpreters and translators with Chinese in Shanghai and Taipei. Translation and Interpreting Studies 4(2), 210–238.
Thiéry, C. (2015). Diplomatic interpreting. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, Franz Pöchhacker (ed.), 107-108. Routledge.
Xie, D. (2022). A comparison between non-professional and professional interpreters, and the public perception of them: Using Tsai Ing-Wen’s 2016 and 2020 international press. [Unpublished master thesis]. National Taiwan University.
Xin, L. (2018). Mediation through modality shifts in Chinese-English government press conference interpreting. Babel, 64(2), 269-293.
Yang, D. (2017). Professional image of Chinese-English conference interpreters in Taiwan: Self-representatives vs. perceptions. [Unpublished master thesis]. National Taiwan University.
Wadensjö, C. (2008). In and off the show: Co-constructing ‘invisibility’ in an interpreter-mediated talk show interview. Meta, 53(1), 184-203.
Waddell, T.F, & Sundar, S. S. (2017). #thisshowsucks! The overpowering influence of negative social media comments on television viewers. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61(2), 393-409.
Zwischenberger, C. (2009). Conference interpreters and their self-representation: A world-wide-based survey. Translations and Interpreting Studies, 4(2), 239-253.
Zwischenberger, C. (2017). Professional self-perception of the social role of conference interpreters. In The Changing Role of the Interpreter, Marta Biagini, Michael S. Boyd, Claudia Monacelli (ed.), 52-74. Routledge.