【摘要】：在當(dāng)今web2.0的信息時(shí)代下，司法制度在短時(shí)間內(nèi)還不能充分健全，司法實(shí)踐中法官受到各方因素的影響和控制而不能獨(dú)立審判的現(xiàn)象仍很普遍。除了媒體從業(yè)人員需要有法律素養(yǎng)以外，法官也迫切地需要具備媒介素養(yǎng)，而不是一味地被媒體牽著鼻子走，再責(zé)其為“媒介審判”。 近年來(lái)，先后出現(xiàn)的劉涌案、張金柱案、許霆案等引起全國(guó)關(guān)注，無(wú)不反映了法官與媒體從業(yè)人員的這種相輔相成、互相制約的關(guān)系，迫切地要求法官及其他法律從業(yè)人員必須樹(shù)立媒介素養(yǎng)的意識(shí)，從而不在審判中處于被動(dòng)，進(jìn)而達(dá)到獨(dú)立審判。 有相關(guān)學(xué)者指出：“法官審案，理應(yīng)不受其他行政機(jī)關(guān)、社會(huì)團(tuán)體和個(gè)人的干涉，甚至不受法院的干涉，，當(dāng)然不受媒體輿論的干涉。法院審案，不受上級(jí)法院的干涉，當(dāng)然也更不受媒體輿論的干涉。而偏偏我們中國(guó)的司法機(jī)關(guān)容易被社會(huì)輿論所左右，這不是說(shuō)我們的新聞媒體比其他國(guó)家的媒體有影響力，而恰恰說(shuō)明了中國(guó)的法官還缺乏獨(dú)立的地位和理念�！� 信息時(shí)代下，法官迫切需要提高媒介素養(yǎng)。無(wú)論是新聞敘事還是網(wǎng)民，都會(huì)對(duì)法官產(chǎn)生或大或小的影響。為法官找到提升媒介素養(yǎng)的途徑，杜絕“媒介審判”、“專(zhuān)家審判”、“草根審判”，正是此文的意義所在。 本文從媒介素養(yǎng)的緣起內(nèi)涵入手，通過(guò)分析信息時(shí)代下法官的角色地位，試圖找出當(dāng)前法官迫切需要媒介素養(yǎng)的理論依據(jù)。本文將著重分析法官媒介素養(yǎng)突顯的特點(diǎn)及其詬病，并借鑒國(guó)外的一些法規(guī)法條及其著名案例，來(lái)作為對(duì)我國(guó)法官媒介素養(yǎng)內(nèi)容的對(duì)比，從中得到一些啟示，最終探尋出提升法官媒介素養(yǎng)的解決方案。
[Abstract]:In the information age of web2.0, the judicial system can not be fully perfected in a short period of time. In judicial practice, judges are influenced and controlled by various factors and cannot be tried independently. In addition to the media practitioners need to have legal literacy, judges also urgently need to have media literacy, rather than blindly led by the media to walk, and then blame it as "media trial." In recent years, the Liu Yong case, the Zhang Jinzhu case, and the Xu Ting case, which have successively appeared, have attracted the attention of the whole country. All of them reflect the complementary and mutually restricted relationship between judges and media professionals. Judges and other legal practitioners must establish the awareness of media literacy so as not to be passive in the trial and then to achieve independent trial. Some scholars have pointed out: "judges should not be interfered with by other administrative organs, social organizations and individuals, or even by the courts, but certainly not by the media and public opinion." Court cases are not interfered with by higher courts and, of course, by media opinion. But just because our Chinese judiciary is easily influenced by public opinion, this is not to say that our news media is more influential than the media of other countries, but it precisely shows that Chinese judges still lack an independent position and concept. " In the information age, judges urgently need to improve their media literacy. No matter news narration or netizen, can produce to judge or big or small influence. To find a way to improve the media literacy for judges, to put an end to "media trial", "expert trial", "grassroots trial", is the meaning of this article. Starting with the origin of media literacy, this paper tries to find out the theoretical basis for the urgent need of media literacy by analyzing the role of judges in the information age. This paper will focus on the analysis of the characteristics and criticism of judges' media literacy, and draw lessons from some foreign laws and regulations and famous cases, as a comparison of the content of our judges' media literacy, and get some enlightenment from it. Finally, to explore a solution to improve the media literacy of judges.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：G206;D926.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 龐凌;司法如何介入政治[J];法學(xué);2002年11期

2 顧培東;論對(duì)司法的傳媒監(jiān)督[J];法學(xué)研究;1999年06期

3 劉斌;論傳媒與司法公正鍍[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)論壇;2005年06期

本文編號(hào)：2412279