The Study On Contradicting Between Media Supervision And Judicial Justice

Media, as the carrier of information, is becoming more and more important in the contemporary society rich in information. However, media has been misunderstood by the public for a long period of time, as media is incorrectly considered to represent the voice of the government. As the news press has been reported very formally and politically, everything reported by media has been thought to be the attitude of the government. This phenomenon puts pressure on the judicial activities, then the"Justice Intervention"is more likely to happen. However, the news reported may not be reasonably fair, comprehensive, or true, Many reasons cause the intervention from public media. Two of the most important are the contradictions between freedom of press and judicial justice, and the contradictions between judicial independence and media supervision. We hereby have to find out effective methods to achieve the balance between media and justice, by conducting a research on the basic theory of media supervision, and current situation of judicial justice.This article consists of four parts. First is the rights of media supervision and basic theory of judicial justice. To demonstrate the rights and restrictions of media supervision, three angles are used, which include main body of media, rights and restrictions of media on judicial justice, and definition and content of judicial justice.The second part explains the contradictions between media supervision and judicial justice. Misconduct by the media is to be studied, when the rights of supervision are exercised. On the other hand, the misconduct by the media shows the content of contradiction between judicial justice and media supervision.The third part is analyzing the reasons of the contradiction between media supervision and judicial justice. By studying both media and judicial characteristics, target values, differences of language used, and differences of focus and judging standards, it explores the reasons of the contradictions.The fourth part is the balance conception from the author. Firstly, specific rules are to be followed in media supervision. Secondly, balance conception is outlined by comparing the media's supervision on justice and judicial regulation on media's supervision. Lastly but not the least, legal practice is mentioned to eliminate the side effects of media supervision, to guarantee judicial justice.