论自媒体对司法的影响-法学理论专业毕业论文.docxVIP

1 1 Abstract With the era of We Media, studying the impact of We Media on Judiciary became a hot topic. In recent year, researches and papers about this topic are numerous. However, these studies are either ignored the differences between We Media and traditional media or just stay on the institutional level to describe the boundary between press freedom and judicial independence. As a result, this article tried to abandon the value judgment, considering the social background of China, and then understanding the relationship between We Media, government regulation and citizen’s participation. This article mainly contains four parts. The first part is about the characteristics of We Media. According to the theory of Public Sphere from Habermas, the part one described the advantages and disadvantages of We media. Secondly, I discussed the role of We media in disclosure of social crisis. There is a new trend for normal person to take part in judicial activity with a highly enthusiasm. Then there is the case of mutually reinforcing relationship between the highly enthusiasm and emerging of hot spots. The third part is about the new trend for normal person to take part in judicial activity using We Media: Self-organization, fragmentation of public opinion from the media. The final part is about the impact of We Media on Judicial independence. In my opinion, the role of We Media in the social relationship is more and more important. It’s observable that many social crises are disclosed by We Media. However, We Media are not neutral. When the judicial authorities had been interrupted by administrative authorities, they may play a role to withstand the administrative authorities. Sometimes, people in We Media may be influenced by each other and then reached an unreasonable consensus. In both situations, We Media are un-neutral. Meanwhile, the differences between online participation and offline participation, the different attitudes between legalists and normal person, are