Study On The Interaction And Balance Between Supervision By Public Opinion And Judicial Response In New Media Age

The conflict and balance between public opinion and judicial activity essentially is the comparison between two values, namely freedom of speech and judicial independence.Among these two, freedom of speech mainly protects the fundamental rights of the general public while judicial independence protects those rights much deeper from the standpoint of national system. These two values are not in opposition to each other but promote mutually. The realization of them needs the examine of social development and their harmonious coexistence is the very important support for the normal function of the society. During the judicial report the journalists must prevent their work from media trial and turn their work into media supervision by rational guiding and accurate reflecting,in that way contributing to the realization of the rule of law.The appearance of new media brings about new power for media supervision but also new opportunities and challenges for ordinary new media users and related supervision department. The interactivity and instantaneity transforms thousands of people from audiences to users, changes traditional one-way communication model, enlarges the range of freedom of speech. With the rise of internet forum the Modern Public Sphere is built, a place where modern citizens gathered to discuss and debate about public affair, rethink and analyze public power. Facts come out of water by repeated verification, truth becomes more and more clear by endless debate, the intelligence of people improved greatly by practice this art of public expression. Cyber negotiation brings new chance for judicial democracy, cyber anti-corruption activity brings big threat to potential public power abusers.To value public opinion impartially we should see the two sides of the coin according to the standard that whether public opinion cross the line. Proper supervision has positive and constructive meaning while media trial pose bad influence to judicial justice. On the one hand proper supervision helps build up dignity of judiciary by improve its transparency and objectivity, provides more ideas for the complete of law-making through hearing from the voice of general public. On the other hand media trial jeopardizes the fairness of trial results and easy to harm the legal right and interest of related party involved in a case.Therefore the reporters must be very clear about their duties when proceeding judicial reports and strictly stick to their professional morality, record,publish and comment on cases objectively. Judges who will decide the final results of a legal issue must hold a strong belief to law and improve their professional skills, when deciding a case they should follow their inner voice, prevent themselves from any interference from outside world. At last, the political reform need to walk side by side with judicial reform in China, only by doing that the boundary could be clearly drew for political power, judicial power and media power, thus the value of check and balance of media supervision and judicial independence could be truly realized.The emergence of new media brings about new energy for supervision by public opinion, both opportunity and challenge for judicial response. The interactivity and instantaneity of new media changes the one-way information dissemination mode, transforming thousands of audiences into users. Its massive informativeness and sharing ability clears up the information dissemination boundary and enlarges the scope of freedom of speech. Its individuality and selectivity sets a higher standard to the screening ability for both the audiences and supervision organizations. The rise of internet forums construct a space for people to review and reflect public power, discuss and debate about public business which could be regarded as modern public domain. Facts be reveled after repeated verification, truth become evident after ceaseless questioning and debates, the intelligence of people is greatly developed and improved by constant practice of rational expression. Network negotiation brings a brand new moment for judicial democracy, network anti-corruption activity poses great warming effect to potential public power abusers.The interaction and balance between supervision by public opinion and judicial response in new media age could be addressed from these three aspects as follows:Firstly, by strengthening self-discipline management to guarantee the freedom of expression hold by journalists. The very nature of journalism is to reveal truth and expose facts, while the commercial and political inclination lead it to just the opposite way, it not only make journalists` reports less objective, less authoritative but also cause it deviate from the right path. Therefore, self-regulation, purify reporting motivation, lead civilized communication and spread positive energy in the whole society is the very responsibility that journalism should bear and never shed of.Secondly, promote self-regulation within network community, improve rational judicial democratic participation. In a new media age, to protect the freedom of judicial speech of new media should depend on the construction of self-regulation rules and self-discipline system by taking methods like reducing insulting words, reporting vicious rumors, punishing harmful slanders to discover and establish a more reasonable and more harmonious network atmosphere in which facts be reveled after repeated verification, truth become evident after ceaseless questioning and debates, the intelligence of people greatly developed and improved by constant practice of rational expression.Thirdly, deepen judicial reform and ensure the independence of justice. The expect and looking forward to the judicial justice is the inexhaustible motive force for supervision by public opinion, the realization of fairness and justice in each individual case is the final source of judicial authority. Insisting on independent adjudication, separating from the interference of other forces could never be achieved without firm legal belief of judges, without the profound understanding of law articles by judges, without the competent professional skills and high-level performance demonstrated by judges. As a result, establishing a well-made legal professional community is the key step for promotion of judicial justice, setting up judicial authority and spread of legal belief.