网络法制节目与网民评论交互对司法公开的影响
论文作者:www.51lunwen.org论文属性:硕士毕业论文 thesis登出时间:2017-04-11编辑:lgg点击率:5872
论文字数:36876论文编号:org201704081923075527语种:英语 English地区:中国价格:$ 66
关键词:英语毕业论文网民评论司法公开批评话语研究
摘要:本文是英语毕业论文,本研究主要以批评话语分析理论为基础,通过分析网络法制节目与网民评论交互对司法公开的作用,旨在揭示此交互对案件信息披露的司法公开带来的问题,从而提出规范网络法制媒体报道的建议。
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
The first chapter generally introduces the research via six parts: rational, significance, research objective and research questions,
methodology and data collection, organization of the
thesis and summary. What needs to be noticed is that what and how the linguistic materials are used in the research are clearly described, together with survey plans, which are important to understanding the kernel parts of the research: Chapter Four to Chapter Six.
1.1 Rationale
When it comes to the status quo of legal reporting in China (Xu, Xun and Fan Xin, 2012; Yao Dong, 2011), domestic mainstream
Media (Yang Lixin, 2014; Zhang Cunjian, 2015) have been focusing on reporting major legal cases in various forms of online legal programs (hereinafter referred to as “programs”), such as talk shows, feature story and expert commentary, etc. With the trend of stigmatization1 of experts (Wen Jun and Luo Feng, 2014), a number of programs start to add professional comments to voice over instead of inviting experts to comment in person. “…Media tends to make legal reporting into entertaining events…and some experts usually comment on legal cases and mingle their personal opinions and emotional factors into judging a specific case” (Chen Yanxia, 2014: 33). Programs are most presided by voice-over or hosts instead of experts for the stigmatization phenomenon. Scholar Wen Jun and Luo Feng (2014) also agreed on this point, they concluded that Internet has made the public intensively exposed to knowledge and information, which threats the social status and observations of some experts. In this way, netizens can watch programs with less influence of stigmatization of experts. Thus, most programs have adopted this form and enjoyed great popularity, yet it should not be deemed as a progressive phenomenon at present if it goes without limit (Yao Dong, 2011; Yao Guangyi, 2015). There are scholars who agree on the supervising function of legal reporting, such as “The trial should be public and so are the evidences because by this way the public opinion can supervise judicial events and prevent corruption so as to achieve justice and equality” (Cheng Zhennan, 2015: 28). In recent years, the concept “Ruling Country by Law” has been widely spread throughout China, and consequently judicial fairness and judicial publicity are of paramount importance in the eyes of the public (Yang Lixin, 2014). As a result, an increasing number of people have exerted a tremendous fascination on discussing current major legal cases via Internet (Zhang, Cunjian, 2015), especially on aspects concerning judicial publicity. Programs enable netizens to not only access to information of legal cases, but also to exchange ideas, even to exert impact on judicial publicity (hereinafter referred to as “impact”). “Against the era of new media, some legal cases cannot escape from public
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。