“媒体审判”现象探析
|
摘要
随着依法治国理念的深入人心,司法领域逐渐成为人们关注的焦点。媒体对司法案件的报道一方面满足了受众的知情权,另一方面由于媒体舆论监督功能的越位而形成的“媒体审判”现象也日益凸显其负面效应。“媒体审判”现象表现在现实中,是媒体引用片面、夸张甚至失实的案情作报道,刺激公众的爱憎情绪,超越正常的法律程序对涉案人员作出定性、定罪、定刑以及胜诉或败诉等预设性审判,给司法机关带来巨大的心理压力,致使其无法独立公正的行使司法审判权,从而给法制建设的推进、法治精神的传播、司法权威的树立带来一系列消极影响。“邓玉娇刺官案”本是一起普通的刑事案件,但从它引起的轰动性上看却具有典型性。本文回答了以下几个问题:从邓玉娇案件看媒体行为是如何引致“媒体审判”现象的发生?“媒体审判”现象发生的原因?如何防范“媒体审判”现象?
全文共分为五章,第一章为绪论,论述了对“媒体审判”现象的研究缘起、研究现状、研究方法及意义。第二章归纳了“媒体审判”现象进入我国理论界的渊源及“媒体审判”的概念,得出“媒体审判”的实质是掌握着话语权、监督权、知情权的媒体舆论监督功能的越位,并对“媒体审判”和舆论监督加以区别。第三章为全文的重点,分别运用波特图式及沉默螺旋效应理论对传统媒体和网络媒体中的“媒体审判”现象进行分析,得出传统媒体和网络媒体在“媒体审判”现象中的行为表现,并进一步得出“媒体审判”的负面影响和我国“媒体审判”现象的现实图景。第四章和第五章探究了“媒体审判”现象出现的原因,并提出规范意见。
With the Philosophy of the rules of law deeply rooted in the people’s heart, justice has become a gradual focus in the society. The effect brought by media justice of judicial cases is also two-sided: one the one hand, reports of judicial cases by media serve to satifisfy the audience’s right to know; on the other hand, because of the offside function of trial by media, its negative effects has become more and more salient. In reality, the trial by media is realized in its reports based on one-sided, exagerated and even non-factual cases in order to induce the public’s emotions like love and hate. Trial by media aims to make predictive qualitative conviction of the suspects’criminal facts beyond the normal proceedings in law, which brings about great pressure on the judiciary. Therefore, the judiciary is not able to perform their right to make just, fair and independent judgement; thus, trial by media produces a range of negative effects on the promotion of legal system, the spread of the spirit of the rules of law and the establishment of the judiciary authority. Deng thorn official case" was in fact an ordinary criminal case, but it was typical of its sensational stimulation. Therefore, around such a case, the present study aims to answer the following questions:
(1)How did media behavior lead to "trial by media" phenomenon?
(2)What are "trial by media" phenomenon causes?
(3)How to prevent "trial by media" phenomenon?
The present study is divided into five chapters. Chapter One is the introduction of the thesis. Here the origins of the phenomena of trial by media, its current researches ,approaches and significances are introduced. Chapter Two is the literature reivew of previous studies on trial by media. In this chapter, the thesis focuses on the concept of trial by media and the previous studied conducted on it. In essence, trial by media is the offsid function of the media, whose original duty is to supervise the public opinon to speak, to supervise and to know. In addition, the differences between trial by media and the right to supervise the public opinion are distinguished at last.The major part of the present study is put in Chapter Three, in which the respective roles played by traditional media and online media in trial by media are analyzed in details based on the Porter Schema theory and the theory of spiral silence effect. In the end, the negative effects brought by trial by media are further testified and trial by media in China is also described. Last but not least, the reasons of the ocurrence of trial by media get explored and specific suggestions are listed at last.
全文共分为五章,第一章为绪论,论述了对“媒体审判”现象的研究缘起、研究现状、研究方法及意义。第二章归纳了“媒体审判”现象进入我国理论界的渊源及“媒体审判”的概念,得出“媒体审判”的实质是掌握着话语权、监督权、知情权的媒体舆论监督功能的越位,并对“媒体审判”和舆论监督加以区别。第三章为全文的重点,分别运用波特图式及沉默螺旋效应理论对传统媒体和网络媒体中的“媒体审判”现象进行分析,得出传统媒体和网络媒体在“媒体审判”现象中的行为表现,并进一步得出“媒体审判”的负面影响和我国“媒体审判”现象的现实图景。第四章和第五章探究了“媒体审判”现象出现的原因,并提出规范意见。
With the Philosophy of the rules of law deeply rooted in the people’s heart, justice has become a gradual focus in the society. The effect brought by media justice of judicial cases is also two-sided: one the one hand, reports of judicial cases by media serve to satifisfy the audience’s right to know; on the other hand, because of the offside function of trial by media, its negative effects has become more and more salient. In reality, the trial by media is realized in its reports based on one-sided, exagerated and even non-factual cases in order to induce the public’s emotions like love and hate. Trial by media aims to make predictive qualitative conviction of the suspects’criminal facts beyond the normal proceedings in law, which brings about great pressure on the judiciary. Therefore, the judiciary is not able to perform their right to make just, fair and independent judgement; thus, trial by media produces a range of negative effects on the promotion of legal system, the spread of the spirit of the rules of law and the establishment of the judiciary authority. Deng thorn official case" was in fact an ordinary criminal case, but it was typical of its sensational stimulation. Therefore, around such a case, the present study aims to answer the following questions:
(1)How did media behavior lead to "trial by media" phenomenon?
(2)What are "trial by media" phenomenon causes?
(3)How to prevent "trial by media" phenomenon?
The present study is divided into five chapters. Chapter One is the introduction of the thesis. Here the origins of the phenomena of trial by media, its current researches ,approaches and significances are introduced. Chapter Two is the literature reivew of previous studies on trial by media. In this chapter, the thesis focuses on the concept of trial by media and the previous studied conducted on it. In essence, trial by media is the offsid function of the media, whose original duty is to supervise the public opinon to speak, to supervise and to know. In addition, the differences between trial by media and the right to supervise the public opinion are distinguished at last.The major part of the present study is put in Chapter Three, in which the respective roles played by traditional media and online media in trial by media are analyzed in details based on the Porter Schema theory and the theory of spiral silence effect. In the end, the negative effects brought by trial by media are further testified and trial by media in China is also described. Last but not least, the reasons of the ocurrence of trial by media get explored and specific suggestions are listed at last.
引文
[1]谭泽明.从邓玉娇案看新闻事实与真相的距离——以《南方都市报》报道为例[J].新闻世界,2009(11):39-40.
[2]董坤.当司法遭遇“媒体审判”——在“媒体审判”困扰下实现司法公正[J].山东省农业管理干部学院学报, 2010(01):129-130.
[3]冯宇飞.从法理学的视角看“媒介审判”的负面效应[J].新闻战线.2002(11):35-37.
[4]雷新明.行政与司法互动浅见[J].贵州民族学院学报(哲学与社会科学版).2002(06):45-48.
[5]庹继光,李缨.“媒介失语”比“媒介审判”更可怕——以一个典型的个案为例[J].新闻界,2005(04):60-61.
[6]廖金英,谢太平.“媒介审判”未必有碍司法公正[J].青年记者,2005(10):53-54.
[7]陆沪生.闻南方某省对案件报道下禁令[J].法治研究.2003(05):35-38.
[8]胡丹.对“媒介审判”现象认识的几个误区[J].新闻知识,2010(03):43-45.
[9]莫守忠.我国古代司法规避法律的原因和现实思考[J].湖南社会科学.2004(06):27-29.
[10]罗文研.对“媒介审判”研究现状的探讨[J].新闻世界,2010(04):100.
[11]魏永征,张咏华,林琳.西方传媒的法制、管理和自律[M].中国人民大学出版社,2005:355.
[12]弥尔顿.论出版自由(M).商务印书馆版,2002:120.
[13]吴献举.“媒体审判”是“媒体舆论监督权”的滥用[J].新闻记者,2002 (9):51-52.
[14]邵志远,袁侃.“媒体审判”现象的多角度思考[J].青年记者,2007(16):29.
[15]韩放.“媒体审判”的原因及预防[J].记者摇篮,2006(10):52.
[16]宋双,薛颖.传媒与司法的冲突与协调[J].长白学刊,2005(01):36-41.
[17]沈正赋.新闻监督与司法独立之间的辩证关系[J].当代传播,2002(01):43-47.
[18]柯磊.谁之过?[J].新闻记者,1993(04):25-27.
[19]徐迅.回眸“夹江打假案”[J].新闻记者,1998(07):31-32.
[20]莫于川.从夹江打假案看行政法若干现实问题[J].行政法学研究,1997(01).
[21]朱元涛.夹江打假案,欣喜还是悲哀[N].中国律师报,1996-5-8.
[22]戴晓蓉.媒体角色功能性错位——看愈演愈烈的“媒体审判”现象[J].新闻知识, 2005,(11):91-92.
[23]黄晓.媒体审判与角色错位[J].中国记者, 2003(11):44-45.
[24]魏永征.新闻传播学教程[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002:98.
[25]慕明春.“媒介审判”的机理与对策[J].现代传播,2005(01):64-66.
[26]陈萍.传媒与司法关系之探究——媒体审判正当性之法理分析[J].法制与社会, 2009(10):37-38.
[27]王平.新闻审判·新闻侵权·新闻监督[J].今传媒,2005(06):27-28.
[28]王军.新闻工作者与法律[M].北京:中国广播电视出版社,1999:78-85.
[29]贺卫方.“传媒与司法三题”[J].法学研究,1998(06):21-26.
[30]杜刚.论执政党视阈下的新闻舆论监督[J].中国出版,2011(02):6-9.
[31]李铁牛.用“以人为本”理念促进舆论监督的良性循环[J].理论探索, 2007(01):53-55.
[32]张剑秋,郭志媛.传媒与司法的辩证关系[J].学习与探索,2003(3):51-53.
[33]任贤良.舆论监督的现状、问题与解决方法思考[J].中国记者,2005(07):4-7.
[34]黄小勇.当司法遭遇“媒介审判”我们该何去何从[J].中国党政干部论坛,2010(04):54-56.
[35]付松聚,张翅.中国媒介审判分析及反思[J].东南传播,2008(1):30-31.
[36]程荣斌.刑事诉讼法[M].中国政法大学出版社,2002:225.
[37]苏力.论法律活动的专门化[M].中国政法大学出版社,1996:176.
[38]刘娟,唐中科.媒介审判——媒介权力的异化[J].新闻爱好者,2009(18):12.
[39]高一飞.司法与媒体的复杂关系与简单关系[J].中国新闻研究中心,http://www.cddc.net/shownews.asp?newsid=9570,2007-1-5.
[40]金凌云.广东法院封杀六名记者[J].中国新闻周刊,2004-10-1.
[41]汉斯·林德.公正审判与新闻自由——两种针对国家的权利[M].冯军译.公法(第二卷).北京:法律出版社.2004:1.
[42]杨明品.新闻舆论监督[M].中国广播电视出版社,2001:102.
[43]李粟,周诗妮.媒介审判与舆论监督的转化[J].新闻传播,2009(08):103.
[44]方祯.从邓玉娇事件看网络传媒的公共性[J].新闻爱好者,2010(04):119-120.
[45]李瑞芳.“邓玉娇事件”网络舆论风暴的生成及其特点分析[J].东南传播, 2009(10):46-47.
[46]克里福德.G克里斯廷安.媒介公正[M].华夏出版,2004:2.
[47]陈超南.彩色的天平一一传媒伦理新探[M].湖北教育出版,2001:24
[48]杨学丽.从“邓玉娇案”看网络舆论参与下的议题互动[J].新闻爱好者,2009(20):120-121.
[49]杨学丽.报刊社会责任要求的深化——以《南方都市报》“邓玉娇案”报道为例[J].新闻世界,2009(09):126-127.
[50]高一飞.邓玉娇杀官案中的媒体博弈[J].检察风云,2009(12):65.
[51]张文祥.从“邓玉娇案”看侦查阶段的信息公开[J].青年记者, 2009(19):59-60.
[52]程宝新.浅议邓玉娇案折射出的现阶段我国司法工作之特点[J].法制与社会, 2009(20):96.
[53]陈桥生.“舆论绑架”现象及其规避[J].新闻战线,2007(06):38-40.
[54]陈力丹,王辰瑶.舆论绑架与媒体逼视—论公共媒体对私人领域的潜越[J].新闻界,2006(2):24-26.
[55]许菁.从“邓玉娇案”看媒体审判[J].广西青年干部学院学报,2010(02):73-75.
[56]周知.新闻倾向性与媒体审判探析——以“南京6.30醉驾案”的媒体报道为例[J].新闻知识,2010(04):40-41.
[57]万志鹏.论“媒体审判”对司法的影响——以湘潭“黄静”案为视角[J].湖南科技大学学报(社会科学版),2009(03):61-64.
[58]汤丽声.试论新闻自由与司法独立的关系——对我国媒体审判现象的反思[J].法制与社会,2009(13):149-150.
[59]王越,梁刚.网络舆论监督与司法审判互动——以“邓玉娇案”为例[J].北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版),2010(02):5-10.
[60]廖言.慎防网络舆论卷起“媒体审判”[J].政府法制,2009(21):10.
[61]李润权.网络环境下“沉默的螺旋”理论的消解[J].新闻世界,2010(09):159-160.
[62]陈强,曾润喜,徐晓林.网络舆情反沉默螺旋研究——以“中华女事件”为例[J].情报杂志, 2010(08):6-8.
[63]师文静.网络传播中“沉默的螺旋”理论分析[J].青年记者, 2009(05):4-5.
[64]王琦.网络传播中“反沉默螺旋”现象浅析——以“家乐福事件”为例[J].新闻爱好者,2009(12):67.
[65]赵永红.刑事程序性裁判研究[M].北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,2005.
[66]李勇.论媒体监督与司法独立的冲突与制衡[J].金卡工程(经济与法),2010(05):23-24.
[67]王好学.论“媒体审判”与司法独立——以重庆打黑为思维切入点[J].金卡工程(经济与法),2010(04):28-29.
[68]吴丽,付云华.浅论“媒体审判”与司法公正的冲突[J].法制与经济(下旬), 2010(04):67.
[69]季卫东.法治秩序的建构[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999:67-70.
[70]景汉朝.传媒监督与司法独立的冲突与契合[J].现代法学,2002(01):92-100 .
[71]朱玲.传媒与司法关系之探究[J].当代法学,2002(12):39-44.
[72]秦勇,刘再辉,王慧.关于司法公正中的媒体角色[J].理论探索,2009(04):126-129.
[73]卞建林、焦洪昌.传媒与司法[M].中国人民公安大学出版社,2006:89.
[74]贺卫方.司法对新闻自由的保护[J].法律与生活,2000(06):30.
[75]贺卫方.司法的理念与制度[M].中国政法大学出版社,1998:99.
[76]刘红.“媒介审判”的原因与对策[J].安阳工学院学报.2006(4):96-98.
[77]宋玲玲.论新闻自由与公正审判的冲突[J].法制与社会,2008(18):19-20.
[78]侯健.传媒与司法的冲突及其调整──美国有关法律实践评述[J].比较法研究,2001(01):84-90.
[79]李希光.传统新闻界面临的10大挑战及对策[J].新闻与写作,2010(03):22-26.
[80]都玉霞.论司法公正一与新闻自由的良性互动[J].政法从论,2005(03):33-35.
[81]New York Times Co.v.Sullivan,376U.S.254(1964)
[82]谭世贵.论司法独立与媒体监督[J].中国法学,1999(4):12-19.
[83]吴秋余.对“媒介审判”现象的分析[J].新闻战线,2007(05):34-35.
[84]段守亮,尹志君.传媒和司法:互动中的碰撞与和谐[M].公正司法与构建和谐社会,人民法院出版社,2006:57.
[85]顾培东.论对司法的传媒监督[J].法学研究,1999(06):17-29.
[86]罗伯特·厄特.司法独立的保障[M].蒋惠岭译,人民法院出版社,1998:156.
[87]张泽涛.论新闻监替司法的制度设计[J].法律科学,2002(05):31-37.
[88]袁媛.“媒介审判”现象分析[J].青年记者,2008(21):100.
[2]董坤.当司法遭遇“媒体审判”——在“媒体审判”困扰下实现司法公正[J].山东省农业管理干部学院学报, 2010(01):129-130.
[3]冯宇飞.从法理学的视角看“媒介审判”的负面效应[J].新闻战线.2002(11):35-37.
[4]雷新明.行政与司法互动浅见[J].贵州民族学院学报(哲学与社会科学版).2002(06):45-48.
[5]庹继光,李缨.“媒介失语”比“媒介审判”更可怕——以一个典型的个案为例[J].新闻界,2005(04):60-61.
[6]廖金英,谢太平.“媒介审判”未必有碍司法公正[J].青年记者,2005(10):53-54.
[7]陆沪生.闻南方某省对案件报道下禁令[J].法治研究.2003(05):35-38.
[8]胡丹.对“媒介审判”现象认识的几个误区[J].新闻知识,2010(03):43-45.
[9]莫守忠.我国古代司法规避法律的原因和现实思考[J].湖南社会科学.2004(06):27-29.
[10]罗文研.对“媒介审判”研究现状的探讨[J].新闻世界,2010(04):100.
[11]魏永征,张咏华,林琳.西方传媒的法制、管理和自律[M].中国人民大学出版社,2005:355.
[12]弥尔顿.论出版自由(M).商务印书馆版,2002:120.
[13]吴献举.“媒体审判”是“媒体舆论监督权”的滥用[J].新闻记者,2002 (9):51-52.
[14]邵志远,袁侃.“媒体审判”现象的多角度思考[J].青年记者,2007(16):29.
[15]韩放.“媒体审判”的原因及预防[J].记者摇篮,2006(10):52.
[16]宋双,薛颖.传媒与司法的冲突与协调[J].长白学刊,2005(01):36-41.
[17]沈正赋.新闻监督与司法独立之间的辩证关系[J].当代传播,2002(01):43-47.
[18]柯磊.谁之过?[J].新闻记者,1993(04):25-27.
[19]徐迅.回眸“夹江打假案”[J].新闻记者,1998(07):31-32.
[20]莫于川.从夹江打假案看行政法若干现实问题[J].行政法学研究,1997(01).
[21]朱元涛.夹江打假案,欣喜还是悲哀[N].中国律师报,1996-5-8.
[22]戴晓蓉.媒体角色功能性错位——看愈演愈烈的“媒体审判”现象[J].新闻知识, 2005,(11):91-92.
[23]黄晓.媒体审判与角色错位[J].中国记者, 2003(11):44-45.
[24]魏永征.新闻传播学教程[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002:98.
[25]慕明春.“媒介审判”的机理与对策[J].现代传播,2005(01):64-66.
[26]陈萍.传媒与司法关系之探究——媒体审判正当性之法理分析[J].法制与社会, 2009(10):37-38.
[27]王平.新闻审判·新闻侵权·新闻监督[J].今传媒,2005(06):27-28.
[28]王军.新闻工作者与法律[M].北京:中国广播电视出版社,1999:78-85.
[29]贺卫方.“传媒与司法三题”[J].法学研究,1998(06):21-26.
[30]杜刚.论执政党视阈下的新闻舆论监督[J].中国出版,2011(02):6-9.
[31]李铁牛.用“以人为本”理念促进舆论监督的良性循环[J].理论探索, 2007(01):53-55.
[32]张剑秋,郭志媛.传媒与司法的辩证关系[J].学习与探索,2003(3):51-53.
[33]任贤良.舆论监督的现状、问题与解决方法思考[J].中国记者,2005(07):4-7.
[34]黄小勇.当司法遭遇“媒介审判”我们该何去何从[J].中国党政干部论坛,2010(04):54-56.
[35]付松聚,张翅.中国媒介审判分析及反思[J].东南传播,2008(1):30-31.
[36]程荣斌.刑事诉讼法[M].中国政法大学出版社,2002:225.
[37]苏力.论法律活动的专门化[M].中国政法大学出版社,1996:176.
[38]刘娟,唐中科.媒介审判——媒介权力的异化[J].新闻爱好者,2009(18):12.
[39]高一飞.司法与媒体的复杂关系与简单关系[J].中国新闻研究中心,http://www.cddc.net/shownews.asp?newsid=9570,2007-1-5.
[40]金凌云.广东法院封杀六名记者[J].中国新闻周刊,2004-10-1.
[41]汉斯·林德.公正审判与新闻自由——两种针对国家的权利[M].冯军译.公法(第二卷).北京:法律出版社.2004:1.
[42]杨明品.新闻舆论监督[M].中国广播电视出版社,2001:102.
[43]李粟,周诗妮.媒介审判与舆论监督的转化[J].新闻传播,2009(08):103.
[44]方祯.从邓玉娇事件看网络传媒的公共性[J].新闻爱好者,2010(04):119-120.
[45]李瑞芳.“邓玉娇事件”网络舆论风暴的生成及其特点分析[J].东南传播, 2009(10):46-47.
[46]克里福德.G克里斯廷安.媒介公正[M].华夏出版,2004:2.
[47]陈超南.彩色的天平一一传媒伦理新探[M].湖北教育出版,2001:24
[48]杨学丽.从“邓玉娇案”看网络舆论参与下的议题互动[J].新闻爱好者,2009(20):120-121.
[49]杨学丽.报刊社会责任要求的深化——以《南方都市报》“邓玉娇案”报道为例[J].新闻世界,2009(09):126-127.
[50]高一飞.邓玉娇杀官案中的媒体博弈[J].检察风云,2009(12):65.
[51]张文祥.从“邓玉娇案”看侦查阶段的信息公开[J].青年记者, 2009(19):59-60.
[52]程宝新.浅议邓玉娇案折射出的现阶段我国司法工作之特点[J].法制与社会, 2009(20):96.
[53]陈桥生.“舆论绑架”现象及其规避[J].新闻战线,2007(06):38-40.
[54]陈力丹,王辰瑶.舆论绑架与媒体逼视—论公共媒体对私人领域的潜越[J].新闻界,2006(2):24-26.
[55]许菁.从“邓玉娇案”看媒体审判[J].广西青年干部学院学报,2010(02):73-75.
[56]周知.新闻倾向性与媒体审判探析——以“南京6.30醉驾案”的媒体报道为例[J].新闻知识,2010(04):40-41.
[57]万志鹏.论“媒体审判”对司法的影响——以湘潭“黄静”案为视角[J].湖南科技大学学报(社会科学版),2009(03):61-64.
[58]汤丽声.试论新闻自由与司法独立的关系——对我国媒体审判现象的反思[J].法制与社会,2009(13):149-150.
[59]王越,梁刚.网络舆论监督与司法审判互动——以“邓玉娇案”为例[J].北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版),2010(02):5-10.
[60]廖言.慎防网络舆论卷起“媒体审判”[J].政府法制,2009(21):10.
[61]李润权.网络环境下“沉默的螺旋”理论的消解[J].新闻世界,2010(09):159-160.
[62]陈强,曾润喜,徐晓林.网络舆情反沉默螺旋研究——以“中华女事件”为例[J].情报杂志, 2010(08):6-8.
[63]师文静.网络传播中“沉默的螺旋”理论分析[J].青年记者, 2009(05):4-5.
[64]王琦.网络传播中“反沉默螺旋”现象浅析——以“家乐福事件”为例[J].新闻爱好者,2009(12):67.
[65]赵永红.刑事程序性裁判研究[M].北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,2005.
[66]李勇.论媒体监督与司法独立的冲突与制衡[J].金卡工程(经济与法),2010(05):23-24.
[67]王好学.论“媒体审判”与司法独立——以重庆打黑为思维切入点[J].金卡工程(经济与法),2010(04):28-29.
[68]吴丽,付云华.浅论“媒体审判”与司法公正的冲突[J].法制与经济(下旬), 2010(04):67.
[69]季卫东.法治秩序的建构[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999:67-70.
[70]景汉朝.传媒监督与司法独立的冲突与契合[J].现代法学,2002(01):92-100 .
[71]朱玲.传媒与司法关系之探究[J].当代法学,2002(12):39-44.
[72]秦勇,刘再辉,王慧.关于司法公正中的媒体角色[J].理论探索,2009(04):126-129.
[73]卞建林、焦洪昌.传媒与司法[M].中国人民公安大学出版社,2006:89.
[74]贺卫方.司法对新闻自由的保护[J].法律与生活,2000(06):30.
[75]贺卫方.司法的理念与制度[M].中国政法大学出版社,1998:99.
[76]刘红.“媒介审判”的原因与对策[J].安阳工学院学报.2006(4):96-98.
[77]宋玲玲.论新闻自由与公正审判的冲突[J].法制与社会,2008(18):19-20.
[78]侯健.传媒与司法的冲突及其调整──美国有关法律实践评述[J].比较法研究,2001(01):84-90.
[79]李希光.传统新闻界面临的10大挑战及对策[J].新闻与写作,2010(03):22-26.
[80]都玉霞.论司法公正一与新闻自由的良性互动[J].政法从论,2005(03):33-35.
[81]New York Times Co.v.Sullivan,376U.S.254(1964)
[82]谭世贵.论司法独立与媒体监督[J].中国法学,1999(4):12-19.
[83]吴秋余.对“媒介审判”现象的分析[J].新闻战线,2007(05):34-35.
[84]段守亮,尹志君.传媒和司法:互动中的碰撞与和谐[M].公正司法与构建和谐社会,人民法院出版社,2006:57.
[85]顾培东.论对司法的传媒监督[J].法学研究,1999(06):17-29.
[86]罗伯特·厄特.司法独立的保障[M].蒋惠岭译,人民法院出版社,1998:156.
[87]张泽涛.论新闻监替司法的制度设计[J].法律科学,2002(05):31-37.
[88]袁媛.“媒介审判”现象分析[J].青年记者,2008(21):100.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |