Contemporary China "Media Trial"

Nowadays, mass media has great influences in all fields of society via its advanced means of spreading. While enjoying the convenience brought by media, people also realize the negative effects caused by impropriate participating judicial trial. Based on the background that media is encouraged to supervise laws, controversy comes up that media abuses to use this power and affects judicial fairness. Modern media is concerned as "the Fourth Power" in democratic countries, and advanced media is also thought significant sign of democratic country and free society. Yet, Media has to keep sense of propriety in mind, or it may hinder judicial fairness and hurt privy’s legal rights. Recent years, clues have been observed that results of some cases were influenced by media massive reporting. This paper researches the harmonious coexistence of media supervision and judicial fairness.This paper, on one hand, starts from analyzing typical case of media judge to reveal its substance; on the other hand, for the controversial definitions in this field, proposes its own opinions based on literature review. This paper verifies through psychological ways that judicial fairness cannot avoid been affected by media judge. Furthermore, Then through the analysis of freedom of expression, the independence of the judiciary and the right to break the inertia of thinking of the previous studies, establish a unity of opposites between the freedom of opinion and a fair trial, to change the "trial by media" and independent trial, freedom of opinion and other rights inherent understanding of the conflict.This paper consists of4sections. Section1introduces "media judge" and several kinds of theoretical results after literature review. In section2, this paper explains tow medias get involved into the process of trial and how they affect final results. In the next sections, this paper tell the connections and differences of media supervision and media judge, and gives out conclusions of whether media judge can hinder judicial fairness after meticulous research. At last, suggestions are proposed for regulating media judge.