Post by account_disabled on Mar 10, 2024 3:41:54 GMT
How to report on legal issues in the journalistic world with all the rigor and seriousness that these issues require? Is there a lexical problem when reporting? Should there be more communication between both worlds to communicate better? *FIDE organized the session on June 26 “Legal Communication: Legal language, right to information and access to justice”, framed within the Forum of Journalism and Law. Legal information has three purposes: to guarantee the fundamental right to inform, to guarantee the right to receive truthful information and to guarantee that there is a public process so that abuses do not occur, that is, to exercise surveillance work. For all of the above, oral trials are public. They are not public, however, and despite the fact that information about them is obtained, the proceedings. Why aren't they public? As also occurs in the investigation phase, the prosecution goes on the offensive and the defense usually waits.
What happens, then, is that in some casos you can lack the honor of the defendant. It was mentioned in the session that in some casos there is a tendency to judge or condemn the defendant in the media when there is still no conviction. It was also stated that sometimes erroneous or inaccurate information has been published in the media., which leads one to think about whether there is a problem of interpretation or if simply translating the legal jargon for a better understanding by the reader distorts the information. Legal journalism and all its news require a high degree of specialization, especially when compared to other sectors of journalism. It is so important because the surveillance of USA Phone Number one of the public powers is exercised and because of the tendency to judicialize political life. Then, What problems are journalists? They must offer truthful information and of public interest in a world that does not seem to be interested in collaborating. There is a lack of communication between the actors of the legal world and the actors of the journalistic world.
A lack of trust has been created over the years that has caused a judge or a prosecutor not to want to give explanations or provide information to newspapers. It was also highlighted that in media judicial processes there are many conflicting interests and each one defends in their own way what is best for them. Journalistic work must be valued, which guarantees the right to inform and be informed, while seeking an increase in the professionalism of the legal sections of the media, which have also been diminished by the great existence of new media and formats that require informative immediacy that can harm legal information. Several solutions were proposed to solve the previously mentioned problems: Legislate so that information on processes that are in the investigation phase is limited. Inform taking much more into account the presumption of innocence. Get judges or prosecutors to give explanations to the press (and to society). FIDE organized on June 26 the session "Legal Communication: Legal language, right to information and access to justice", framed within the Journalism and Law forum.
What happens, then, is that in some casos you can lack the honor of the defendant. It was mentioned in the session that in some casos there is a tendency to judge or condemn the defendant in the media when there is still no conviction. It was also stated that sometimes erroneous or inaccurate information has been published in the media., which leads one to think about whether there is a problem of interpretation or if simply translating the legal jargon for a better understanding by the reader distorts the information. Legal journalism and all its news require a high degree of specialization, especially when compared to other sectors of journalism. It is so important because the surveillance of USA Phone Number one of the public powers is exercised and because of the tendency to judicialize political life. Then, What problems are journalists? They must offer truthful information and of public interest in a world that does not seem to be interested in collaborating. There is a lack of communication between the actors of the legal world and the actors of the journalistic world.
A lack of trust has been created over the years that has caused a judge or a prosecutor not to want to give explanations or provide information to newspapers. It was also highlighted that in media judicial processes there are many conflicting interests and each one defends in their own way what is best for them. Journalistic work must be valued, which guarantees the right to inform and be informed, while seeking an increase in the professionalism of the legal sections of the media, which have also been diminished by the great existence of new media and formats that require informative immediacy that can harm legal information. Several solutions were proposed to solve the previously mentioned problems: Legislate so that information on processes that are in the investigation phase is limited. Inform taking much more into account the presumption of innocence. Get judges or prosecutors to give explanations to the press (and to society). FIDE organized on June 26 the session "Legal Communication: Legal language, right to information and access to justice", framed within the Journalism and Law forum.