Connect with us


The media public trial is not just a phenomenon of gossip, but a mechanism for creating unjust cases?



Have you ever felt that such a public trial by the media seems a bit too much?

How about letting the media go to trial?

In a word, excessive exaggeration by the media will greatly infringe on the privacy and reputation of those involved. Moreover, the incident has become the focus of the public, and it has also condensed a strong atmosphere of distrust. It has also produced many unnecessary interventions in the way of investigation or trial, severely hitting the defense of a fair trial, and even excessively deepening our perception of severe punishment. expect.

In particular, Taiwan will launch a system of “national judges” in the future . If the phenomenon of “public trials by the media” cannot be effectively restrained, it is more likely that the good will of the people to participate in trials will be severely damaged.

That is to say, a public trial by the media is not just a report with the theme of social news, but also a complex phenomenon that spans different levels of “public-media-judiciary” and runs through the entire criminal procedure. Through intensive media reports, the parties involved in the judicial system or the public sector, or the audience in society, will be involved in such fluctuations.

Looking back, after the lifting of martial law in our country, all kinds of restrictions on the media were lifted along the way. Radio and TV channels were opened one after another, and news stations were also created in large numbers like mushrooms after rain. In order to break out the competition, the news media not only launched a large number of crime reports, but also tried their best to attract the attention of the content.

As scholars sort out , reporting techniques often appear: 1. Repeated reporting of crime news for a long time. 2. The content of the report often uses exaggerated and sensational terms. 3. The crime report presents detailed criminal methods. 4. Selective non-comprehensive reporting. 5. Take a claim that needs to be proven as a fact. 6. Suggestively making accusations against the parties—reports and comments are inseparable. 7. Let problems such as the principle of the presumption of innocence and the non-disclosure of investigations exist.

Therefore, this kind of reporting mode, for the parties concerned, not only directly causes mental pressure on the criminal suspect and his family life, but also because of the biased reporting of “presumption of guilt”-even if the verdict is not guilty, the lost credibility in the process, relatives, etc. tearing apart, poor career, or exclusion from the community, causing irreparable damage to the personality, reputation, privacy, or property rights of innocent defendants.

As for the public sector, as scholars describe : “In the past, many people in the procuratorial system were full of heroic thinking and handling methods. Detention, criticism of prosecutorial governance “.

In addition, in the social atmosphere of presumption of guilt, populists have also appeared to put pressure on the judiciary, forcing prosecutors or courts, and even witnesses to have to consider the voice of public opinion.

And even if everyone can fight against this phenomenon, the more powerful the media is, the more difficult it is to reverse the impression of the presumption of guilt in society: once the court later acquits, it is very easy for the people to be disappointed with the judiciary; such a cycle “Judicial prestige” will continue to be diminished. On the other hand, if even judicial judges who have received professional training and are accustomed to such an atmosphere on weekdays will be affected by it-for the ” national judges ” who will participate in trials in the future, it may be even more difficult to resist.

Finally, for the general public, media public trials will also deepen their fear of crime. For example , the literature pointed out that National Chung Cheng University conducted a telephone survey and analysis of the public and found that the main source of citizens’ overall public security feelings is “news media reports” (62.2%), followed by “communications with relatives and friends” (16.9%), indicating that “they have been victimized by crimes.” only 11.2%. Therefore, when the public reads a lot of crime news, and the media overreports crime news, not only the fear of being killed is aroused, but also people may have more expectations for severe punishments. of the quagmire.

Why still report? The original intention of press freedom?

In order to implement democratic governance, it is actually dependent on the media to report on the administration one by one and arouse people’s comments, so that the government can be effectively supervised.

As stated in the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 689, “In order to ensure that the news media can provide diverse information with news value, promote the full circulation of information, satisfy the people’s right to know, form public opinion and achieve public supervision, in order to maintain Freedom of the press is an indispensable mechanism for the normal development of a democratic and pluralistic society, and should be guaranteed by Article 11 of the Constitution.”

In addition to the separation of powers in traditional countries, the perspective of checks and balances in governance is why the media is called the fourth power.

Therefore, in order to ensure the stable operation of the government, the media has more or less room to report on major and minor issues of governance; if the reporting of criminal incidents is completely prohibited, the media’s function of monitoring the development of criminal policies will be lost.

However, the reason why the news media enjoys a special status in a democratic society is because it has two major tasks of “forming public opinion and supervising politics”; it also makes the news media have to fulfill those public tasks before they can fully advocate non-interference freedom of the press.

Otherwise, if you just use the banner of freedom of the press, continue to sell fear in crime reports, attract readers to read, leave the ideal of the “fourth estate” behind, and become a profit-oriented puppet, then there is no tolerance room.

Therefore , Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 623 pointed out that: on the premise of complying with the principle of proportionality in Article 23 of the Constitution, legislators can impose appropriate restrictions on speech through clear provisions of the law; Tongyuan Interpretation No. 509 also stated: To protect reputation and privacy In order to safeguard the public interest, the state may impose appropriate restrictions on freedom of speech.

That is to say, if the media report satisfies the audience’s desire to pursue the truth, it overly impacts the rights and interests of the parties involved, causing the downfall of the fair court and the rule of law culture; using a news report to impact the interests of all parties only In order to achieve the media’s own profits, it is necessary to appropriately use laws to draw reasonable restrictions on such reports.

Legal restrictions on reporting: Investigations are not public

In order to improve judicial operations and reduce the impact of media public trials on litigation, the Presidential Palace released the ” Report on the Results of the National Judicial Reform Conference ” in September 2017 , aiming to implement the boundaries of “undisclosed investigations”. Filming and broadcasting images of criminal suspects or related persons”, “Holding the administrative, disciplinary or criminal responsibility of those who neglect their duties”, “Empowering the parties and interested parties to correct wrong reports”, “Assisting the media to review the current relevant self-regulatory mechanisms and specifications” etc.

And what is undisclosed investigation? How does the current system work? Is there anything missing?

For example, at the poker table, we often say that the hole cards are seen by others, so it is difficult to win. Similarly, if during the investigation of a crime, someone discloses important information to the suspect or the media, then the follow-up investigation will be even more difficult; It will cause great harm to the other party’s future life.

Therefore, the “Criminal Procedure Law” contains the so-called ” undisclosed investigation ” important regulation, which is to alleviate the phenomenon of public trials by the media, so that the “procuratorate and police” can more accurately investigate and judge, and moderately protect criminal suspects or relationships human rights. In order to fully implement the non-disclosure of investigations, the “Criminal Procedure Law” authorizes the Judicial Yuan and the Executive Yuan to formulate more detailed ” Operational Measures for Non-disclosure of Investigations .” However, these measures are inevitably questionable.

The subject of undisclosed investigation is limited to public agencies, not the media?

This problem stems from the provisions of the ” Secret Investigation Operation Measures “: Personnel who should follow the non-disclosure of investigation refer to prosecutors, public prosecutors, judicial police officers, judicial police, defenders, prosecutors, or other persons who are legally involved in the investigation process. personnel performing duties. It seems that it has nothing to do with people other than “executing duties according to law”.

However , it is also mentioned later in the same method : Prosecutors, public prosecutors, judicial police officers, and judicial police may inform the defendant, criminal suspect, victim, or other interested parties of the regulations on the non-disclosure of investigations, and inform them of “do not disclose or disclose” investigations. Known procedures and content. This also seems to make those “defendants, criminal suspects, victims or other interested parties” also bear the responsibility of keeping the investigation secret.

However, even if the above-mentioned regulations continue to expand the objects that comply with the “secrecy of investigation”, they do not directly mention those media who are closely related to the development of the case (Note). And if the media is not within the scope of control, it does not necessarily have to bear the criminal and administrative responsibility for subsequent leaks of the case.

Unclear reporting boundaries?

The so-called “secrecy of investigation” is not an absolute prohibition without exception. The ” Criminal Procedure Law ” stipulates that if it is “in accordance with laws and regulations” or for “safeguarding public interests” and “protecting legitimate rights and interests,” criminal information can be disclosed appropriately. In order to clarify which matters meet the aforementioned exceptions, the ” Operation Measures for Non-disclosure of Investigations ” further stipulates seven specific disclosures.

This is because media reports can also call for clues, and are an important “tool” for the prosecutors and police to solve crimes; and moderate disclosure of investigation information can also call on the public to pay more attention to avoid further damage and ensure social order.

However, water can carry a boat, and it can also overturn it. Some of the requirements for controlling the disclosure of information may be a bit abstract, which also leaves a wide room for interpretation to the front-line personnel; it also makes some prosecutors happy to use the media. Strengthen your own litigation advantages. In the end, in terms of practical operation, the principle of non-disclosure of investigations is in vain, and “disclosure of investigations” can be freely expanded and expanded according to the needs of handling cases.

What if the report is wrong? Can it be amended and punished with contempt of court?

Regarding the mistakes, whether it is possible to ask for corrections, this involves the concept of media access rights. Under the operation of the current regulations, it can be divided into two types: ” right of reply ” and ” right of correction ” (the link is an example clause); the former allows people to be reported to the media to request a considerable opportunity to reply, and the media cannot refuse ; the latter gives relevant persons the right to request the media to correct errors within a time limit.

Those who have been reported can use those rights to initiate a plea or request correction of misinformation in less time than defamation crimes or civil law damages require time-consuming proceedings.

However, as the scholar mentioned in the paper : “The effectiveness of this method actually depends on the critical strength of public opinion, the subjective opinions of the media on the event, and even the appearance, eloquence and personality charm of the parties themselves… and other uncertain factors. If If you are not careful, choosing “On the Line of Fire” to exercise the right of correction and right of reply will easily lead to a second public trial by the media, which will lead to a vicious circle.”

Furthermore, not all media types are legally obliged to provide media access rights.

As in Interpretation No. 689 of Judicial Yuan Interpretation , Justice Chen Chunsheng once stated in an opinion letter : “The right to request correction and refutation of the reported person is not complete (including print media without regulations, and electronic media only have Article 23 of the Radio and Television Law. Article 62 of the Law on Cable TV and Article 31 of the Law on Satellite Broadcasting and Television)…At present in our country, if a media has newspapers, radio, TV, cable TV, etc. at the same time, its print media workers will follow up and report. It will lead to the fact that the pursued person has no right to request correction and refutation even if he admits that there has been a violation, and if the same enterprise group uses electronic media to quote it, it will form a loophole in the protection of audio-visual persons. It violates the constitutional requirements of the national protection obligation.”

In addition, some people will say that the punishment of “contempt of court” can be added to deal with the media’s indiscriminate reporting of criminal news. But opposing voices believe that the violation of the principle of non-disclosure of investigations in our country is often the “credit” of the prosecutors and police investigators. If the media is only held accountable for crimes, it will easily cause a chilling effect.

In Conclusion

When a specific judicial case becomes the focus, the public trial by the media will inevitably involve the parties involved in the case, their relatives and friends, and even various judicial personnel, as well as the lively crowd waiting by the side, to be involved in this passionate drama. Although all of this is to protect the “right to know” of the audience, it is difficult to implement the principle of “non-disclosure of investigation” in the process. It will bring a lot of interference and controversy to fair trials and even future penalty policies.

However, in the face of such a predicament, the relevant legal system related to the public trial of the media can be said to be quite insufficient, and it is difficult to relieve the entangled tension between the aforementioned parties ; It is more likely to push criminal cases step by step into the abyss of unjust cases. We should all urge legislators to quickly fill this gap in the legal system.

Such repeated weighing, as the author said in ” Freedom of Speech and the Guarantee of Democracy Suspended at Both Ends of the Scale “: “In the inseparable cross-strait histories, the domestic factions that separate and combine, and the treacherous and ever-changing international situation, the justice and Foreign referees gave some directions for thinking, so that we can find ways to struggle between the two floating issues of “avoiding democratic failure” and “avoiding excessive suppression of speech” before the day of world peace, so we often hear people Saying: Taiwan is really a treasure trove of public law.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Decline in GameStop’s Quarterly Revenue





According to financial data, digital gaming sales growth at the Grapevine, Texas, store is not compensating for a drop in in-store purchases.

Despite the company’s best attempts to offset the fall in physical sales with growth in digital transactions, GameStop Corp. just reported its worst quarterly revenue dip in two years. In the three months leading up to October 29th, net sales dropped 8.5% to $1.19 billion, which was lower than the $1.39 billion predicted by two analysts. Loss per share after adjustments came in at 31 cents, which was higher than the predicted loss of 29 cents. The company is only worth $7 billion, and its stock is extremely volatile, therefore very few analysts cover it.

Since becoming chairman of the board this year, Ryan Cohen has been working to reinvigorate GameStop’s growth in Grapevine, which has slowed as customers switch from purchasing game CDs to purchasing digital downloads. To make matters worse, COVID-19 lockdowns crippled GameStop’s retail operation, and supply shortages on consoles have further impacted profits.

According to market research firm NPD Group, overall spending in the gaming business fell 5% in the third quarter compared to the same period a year ago.

Earlier this week, Axios reported that GameStop has begun a new wave of layoffs, with a particular focus on the team developing the company’s blockchain wallet. GameStop also announced layoffs of an undisclosed number of employees and the departure of CFO Mike Recupero in July.

In its earnings release, GameStop said nothing about layoffs

Cohen has been trying to get GameStop involved in digital assets, but it’s been difficult. The company began transitioning into nonfungible tokens in September, when it announced a partnership with cryptocurrency exchange FTX US. The parties agreed to work together on some new e-commerce and online marketing projects and stock some stores with FTX gift cards. However, the crypto market went into a tailspin in November after FTX imploded with $9 billion in liabilities and filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

CEO Matt Furlong stated on an earnings call with analysts that GameStop does not have “a meaningful balance of any cryptocurrency.” We have not and will not put significant shareholder capital at risk by entering this market.

Furlong has stated his optimism for the continued development of digital assets

GameStop became a symbol of the meme-stock mania that swept the retail trading community during the pandemic, in which the price of specific stocks was driven up by online discussion of such stocks on Reddit and other social media platforms rather than by any actual business fundamentals. The stock price, which is down 40% so far this year, rose by around 1% in after-hours trading on Wednesday in response to the news.


Continue Reading


Newcomers Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Kalanick




Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Travis Kalanick.

Three of the most famous people in the tech business are Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Travis Kalanick. They’ve all achieved phenomenal success in technology and been in the front of some of the industry’s most game-changing developments. Sacca is a well-known businessman and investor who put money into companies like Twitter, Uber, and Instagram at an early stage. Dorsey co-founded and currently leads Twitter, while Kalanick created and resigned as head of Uber.

Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Travis Kalanick: Who Are They?

Can You Introduce Me to Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Travis Kalanick? The tech industry is led by visionaries like Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Travis Kalanick. Chris Sacca is a successful businessman, investor, and entrepreneur from the United States. The likes of Twitter, Uber, Instagram, and Kickstarter all counted on his early financial support. Jack Dorsey founded Square and serves as its CEO. He is also a co-founder of Twitter. He is considered a forerunner in the fields of microblogging and online monetary transactions. Uber, the groundbreaking ride-hailing service founded by Travis Kalanick, has completely altered the transportation landscape. It is widely believed that Kalanick single-handedly destroyed the traditional taxi sector with his work on mobile app-based transportation services. All three of these men are quite young yet have already made significant contributions to the technology sector.

How did these three people get where they are today?

Three of the most successful businesspeople alive now are Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Travis Kalanick. The remarkable success of their individual companies has made these three men household names, and they have become IT industry icons. It’s not surprising that these businesspeople have succeeded, given their combined intelligence and doggedness. Chris Sacca, an early investor in Twitter and Uber, was the first of the three to find financial success.

Sacca’s knowledge of the tech business allowed him to see the potential in the social network, and his investment in Twitter allowed Jack Dorsey to start the company. Jack Dorsey played a key role in the development of Twitter and laid the groundwork for the service to go global. Finally, Travis Kalanick entered the digital industry late yet created Uber into a global powerhouse, cementing his place in history as one of the most successful and important business leaders of all time. These three gentlemen all have the requisite smarts and guts to start their own businesses and make a killing.

The Effects of Their Achievements

Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Travis Kalanick’s achievements have had a significant effect. These three men have built successful careers as technological pioneers and entrepreneurs. They have contributed to the development of today’s advanced technological landscape. Twitter, Uber, and Lowercase Capital are the three founders’ most notable accomplishments. Twitter has grown into an important resource for users to keep up with the latest news, trends, and other events, making it one of the most popular social media platforms in the world. The ride-hailing sector has been shaken up by Uber, which has become ubiquitous.

Lowercase Capital is a VC firm that has helped launch the careers of numerous entrepreneurs by investing in over 200 different software businesses. The achievements of Sacca, Dorsey, and Kalanick are not limited to the realms of the businesses they founded. They have a track record of investing in successful tech startups, which in turn inspires new generations of business owners to launch their own ground-breaking ventures. In addition, many people now have jobs because of their investments. Many would-be business owners have looked to Sacca, Dorsey, and Kalanick as examples of success. They have demonstrated that it is possible to achieve one’s goals through perseverance and hard effort. They have also demonstrated that a small number of innovative ideas can have a significant impact on the technological world. Because of this, numerous up-and-comers have been encouraged to follow in their footsteps and develop ground-breaking goods and services.

Perspectives on the “Newcomer”

The names Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Kalanick have become virtually inseparable from the modern information technology sector. These three “up-and-comers” changed the game by daring to challenge the status quo and taking calculated risks. Lowercase Capital was established by Chris Sacca, who has gone on to invest in the likes of Twitter, Uber, and Instagram. Jack Dorsey started both Twitter and Square and currently serves as CEO of both companies. Kalanick is the Uber founder and CEO, and his company has had a profound impact on the transportation sector. These three “newcomers” have all changed the face of technology forever, and their achievements have served as models for other would-be business owners.

Is there any guidance we may glean from their experiences?

Is there any guidance we may glean from their experiences? Current examples of people who have achieved great success include Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Travis Kalanick. These people have made names for themselves in the business and technology communities thanks to their accomplishments in disciplines as diverse as venture capital and entrepreneurship. However, aspiring businesspeople can learn a lot from their experiences. To begin, despite facing setbacks and defeat, all three of these individuals have remained steadfast in their dedication to the undertakings they’ve undertaken. They have shown they are willing to take chances by investing both time and money in their projects. They have also demonstrated skill at establishing and maintaining connections with other powerful individuals. All three of these men exemplify the traits that are crucial for success in business, and by learning from their experiences we may develop our own set of abilities and outlook.


Newcomers to the tech business who have made significant contributions include Chris Sacca, Jack Dorsey, and Kalanick. Each of them rose from obscurity to become a household name and a major force in their respective fields. These three guys have altered the course of technology with their respective venture capital investments (Sacca), startup (Twitter’s Jack Dorsey), and startup (Uber’s Travis Kalanick). They have inspired a new generation of entrepreneurs by demonstrating that anyone, regardless of background, can make a substantial impact on the world.


Continue Reading


Case of the alphabet U.S. drone operations expansion: Wing wants FAA’s blessing D.C. (Reuters)





The Google subsidiary Wing Aviation has applied for a waiver from some FAA drone regulations so that it can expand its operations beyond a single small city in Virginia, according to a notification published by the FAA on Friday. As of early 2019, Wing has supplied a multitude of services for locals of Christiansburg, Virginia, including both scheduled and emergency deliveries. With the goal of serving more people, “Wing is now aiming to expand and improve upon these operations,” the company claimed in its request for waivers from some FAA drone regulations. The organization promised to listen to petitioners before reaching a final call. The FAA was informed by Wing that the company had “made major investments targeted to strengthen both the safety and capacity” of drone operations in the United States. More than 17 months have passed with no reported incidents. Wing seeks FAA clearance to move remote pilot activities “to regional operations centers that can monitor and safely handle a greater number of airliners at once. When it grows, Wing aims to utilize a variant “that has been demonstrated to be dependable in commercial operations and is extremely comparable in its operating characteristics,” Wing said. Yet “to identify and accept this alternate aircraft version,” approval from the FAA is required.

In addition, during the interval, Wing requested that the FAA conduct operator line inspections once every 12 months rather than every three. According to the report, “current limitations will make it infeasible to grow a light-footprint, distributed operation across a neighborhood,” therefore the amendments “will assist assure that more American homes may experience the benefits of (drone) technology.” Small drones can now legally fly over people and at night without special permission under new FAA regulations that went into effect on Wednesday. The long-awaited guidelines require remote identification technology in most situations to enable drone identification from the ground, which is intended to alleviate security concerns.

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.