With the rapid development of the Internet, the importance of the Internet in public opinion expression has become increasingly prominent, and it has gradually become one of the important ways of public opinion expression. People's opinions are fully expressed through the internet, and individual, scattered, weak and even irrational voices gather to form a powerful online public opinion, which competes with public power and affects the handling of events. (1) A correct understanding of online public opinion is one of the ways of public expression, and it is essentially a kind of public opinion, but this kind of public opinion is expressed through new ways such as the Internet. However, does online public opinion really represent public opinion? I don't think online public opinion can fully represent public opinion. First of all, the virtuality, openness and anonymity of the Internet make a lot of emotional remarks spread, while the quality of netizens is uneven, and their views may be irrational, or some netizens may express their personal interests and emotions through the Internet. Therefore, online public opinion cannot fully represent public opinion, so we should treat online public opinion rationally. (2) The relationship between online public opinion and court trial. Internet public opinion and court trial are contradictory and have their own characteristics. As far as contradictions are concerned, court trials are relatively closed and professional. Sometimes, because the media do not understand the court's working procedures and professional regulations, there are often some deviations or inaccuracies in the reports. Therefore, as a media, we should report accurately, make rational and objective comments, answer questions for the people, and guide and guide public opinion reasonably. Of course, online public opinion and court trial also have their own characteristics, and the ultimate goal is to pursue justice. As a platform for the public to express their views, online public opinion is consistent with the principle of openness of court trials to a certain extent, so the relationship between them can be coordinated. (3) The impact of online public opinion on court trials Objectively speaking, the impact of online public opinion on court trials is twofold, both positive and negative. As far as the positive impact is concerned, the first is to enhance the transparency of court trials, so that people can effectively supervise court trials and prevent judicial arbitrariness. At the same time, people's participation strengthens people's knowledge and understanding of court work, reduces irrational voices, and is conducive to maintaining judicial authority. Of course, improper use of online public opinion will also bring negative or negative effects to court trials. The strength of public opinion may bring great pressure to the court trial, form public opinion judgment, affect the justice and independence of the judiciary, reduce the judicial authority of the court, and ultimately harm the legitimate interests of the people themselves. Of course, we should be good at realizing the positive influence of online public opinion on court trials. Internet is a bridge between public opinion and trial. In the past, we never paid attention to this work, which led to the judge's trial being led by "public opinion". Therefore, the court should first pay full attention to the network, a new way of communication or expression, and change its attitude towards online public opinion. At present, some courts have specially arranged network commentators to strengthen communication with netizens and guide public opinion. This is one of the good ways to realize the positive influence of online public opinion on court trial. Of course, we should also be soberly aware that justice and online public opinion should not only communicate with each other, but also be different. People can't interfere with the judiciary on the grounds of public opinion, and the judiciary can't violate the principle and blindly compromise because of public opinion. As a media, we should strengthen our sense of social responsibility, strive to report objectively, accurately and truly, be self-disciplined and heteronomy, and really play its role of supervision and publicity. And netizens should also hold a responsible attitude towards their own speech and society, and make correct, objective and rational remarks to prevent "public opinion violence". (4) The court's response to online public opinion under the background of online public opinion is a problem that must be faced and unavoidable, and the court must respond with a positive attitude. So how to deal with it? First of all, the trial should emphasize openness. We should be good at finding a reasonable connection between trial openness and online public opinion, make full use of the network, concentrate the wisdom of netizens, and promote the trial information disclosure more effectively. At the same time, through the participation of netizens, we will strengthen people's understanding of the law and their understanding and support for the work of the court, and reduce unnecessary public opinion resistance in the work. Secondly, the dispersion, individuality and irrationality of netizens require the court to be more meticulous in its work, strengthen the cultivation of its own quality and professional ethics, reduce the mistakes or other bad behaviors of judges, and reduce the hype on the Internet. Third, actively interpret the law and correctly guide public opinion. Objectively speaking, in many cases, netizens' incomplete understanding of the law, ignorance of trial procedures and rules, and ignorance of cases make their views or opinions irrational, one-sided, and untrue. Individual irrational views are easy to form collective irrational remarks, thus forming a wrong public opinion orientation, and ultimately bringing great passivity to court work. Therefore, in the judicial process, we should pay attention to the response and guidance of public opinion and eliminate irrational, one-sided and wrong public opinion.

Comments |