近年来，历史题材内容大热，许多原本限于专业领域的历史知识逐渐“跨圈”进入普通人的眼帘。如今进行历史文化传播的主体人群也有所变化，不仅包括专业的历史研究者，还包括了许多普通的历史爱好者。哔哩哔哩作为开放的视频网站，其历史区也成为了广大历史爱好者和专业历史研究者生产内容的重要平台。但是，将普通历史爱好者和专业历史研究者所生产的内容进行比较的研究却寥寥无几，因此，对哔哩哔哩历史区UGC和PGC进行比较十分有意义。

基于此，本研究选取哔哩哔哩历史区UGC和PGC作为研究对象，对二者的内容结构做出比较。本研究将内容结构共分表现手法、内容主题、弹幕信息三个板块，研究方法上使用内容分析法和量化文本分析法，采用立意抽样的抽样方法选择共计400个视频、98508条弹幕为分析样本对哔哩哔哩历史区UGC和PGC进行比较研究。

研究发现：一、两者在表现手法上除封面色彩种类和色彩数量、标题字符数外，其他方面均有显著差异；二、两者在内容主题上的类型阶段、功能寓意、立场与敏感性、契合度与理解难度四方均有显著差异；三、两者在弹幕信息上关键词要点各异、情感倾向有显著差异且UGC弹幕语言具体性更强，语义输出分布更广。

在比较过程中，也发现一些值得思考现象：一、UGC视频使用大量影视片段，版权边界模糊；二、PGC反而更加“不专业”，大量内容缺少参考文献的标注；三、UGC标题文案晦涩，理解门槛较高；四、UGC流量思维凸显，内容往往包含冲突性寓意和较强敏感性；五、哔哩哔哩平台中短视频“变长”。

In recent years, the content of historical themes has become very popular, and many historical knowledge that was originally confined to the professional field has gradually “Crossed the circle”and come to the eyes of ordinary people. Today, the main body of historical  communication has also changed, including not only professional history researchers, but also many ordinary history buffs. Bilibili as an open video site, its historical area has also become an important platform for history buffs and professional history researchers to produce content. However, few studies have compared the content produced by ordinary history buffs with that produced by professional history researchers, so it makes sense to compare UGC and PGC in the Bilibili historical area.

Based on this, we choose the historical area of Bilibili UGC and PGC as the research object, and make a comparison of their content structure. In this study, the content structure is divided into three sections: presentation, theme, and barrage information. The research method uses Content Analysis and Quantitative Text Analysis, a total of 400 videos and 98508 barrages were selected as the analysis samples by the method of purposive sampling.

It is found that: 1. there are significant differences between UGC and PGC in presentation, except the color types, the number of colors on the cover and the number of title characters; 2. there are significant differences between UGC and PGC in theme, functional implication, position and sensitivity, degree of agreement and difficulty of understanding; 3. the key words of UGC and PGC are different in barrage information, the emotional tendency is different, the concrete of UGC barrage language is stronger, the distribution of semantic output is wider.

In the process of comparison, we also found some phenomena worth thinking about: 1. UGC video uses a large number of video clips, and the copyright boundary is blurred; 2. PGC is more “Unprofessional”, and a large number of content lacks the annotation of reference literature; 3. UGC title text is obscure, the understanding threshold is higher; 4.UGC Flow Thought is prominent, the content often contains the conflict moral and the strong sensitivity; 5. short video duration on Bilibili platform “Lengthens”.