下面是Fanessay提供的一篇essay范文--The principle of self-media regulation,下面这篇文章主要讨论的是自媒体法律规则。自媒体，是现在生活中新的事物，表现了时代的新活力。自媒体，它解放了人们的生产力，让每个人都可以成为新闻的发布人。可是，在积极的背后，也存在着消极的影响，比如，它使那些缺乏社会安全意识的人有机会可以在自媒体上发布危言耸听的谣言。所以，自媒体需要严格遵守法律原则，打击越界行为。
Since the development of the media has influenced many aspects of social life, it can be said that it is a revolution in the media world and a revolution in the way of people's life. Traditional media era is a "slave" media people, the lack of any real sense of autonomy and their control for the media and the mind control was also didn't know it, so the traditional media is always easy to let a person is in a "treat" state, lack of autonomy has become the people of a kind of habit. In the development of since the media age, however, the nature of the freedom of people obtained the unprecedented development, autonomy has become the characteristics of the era of media, also became one of the characteristics of life in this age of media users, this is an era of let a person spirit is encouraged. However, the development of autonomy at the same time, also can appear a lot of confusion, when new media under the support of technology to give people more freedom, but many people at the same time of freedom has violated the principles of freedom, beyond the limits of its behavior, this goes to problem of law regulation. The law has many aspects to the regulation of the self-media, and the principle is discussed here.
The development of a kind of science and technology often brings a comprehensive and profound influence to the society, and the emergence and development of the media form is driven by technology. At the same time, the development of science and technology will affect people's way of life, and have a profound impact on the value system of human life world, and cultivate all kinds of spirit and value. Since the media under the precondition of the development of science and technology to foster the people of the spirit of freedom, and compared with the traditional media, the people who live under the media is free to choose all kinds of information, and are free to release all kinds of information, people become the master of the media, rather than the "slave" of the media.
However, while the development of self-media gives people freedom, freedom has led to a lot of "deviant" behavior and "beyond the minimum" behavior in the media world. Here are the most prominent is the "trespass" moral and legal violations, both in the blog this classic from the media, or in a variety of chat tool, or is in relatively modern micro letter form, there were many in the moral or legal behavior should be condemned or sanctions, such as false information release, rumors and slander, or even fraud. Some scholars when it comes to weibo this since the media form, said: "since 2009 we have entered into a new age of weibo freedom, like into the blue ocean of information, weibo 'free' with the randomness, don't need formal editing and typesetting proofreading, also do not need correction bare, self-expression, self, everyone can become a journalist." If only the technical arbitrariness appears, this is a phenomenon which is not worth the fuss, the key problem is the escalation of "randomness". The randomness is part of the world of freedom of the media gradually took on a trend of spreading, some even can do in prison he use "micro letter" to do something illegal crime, this is what a ridiculous phenomenon! Freedom itself is a kind of full of the true value, but in a mistaken understanding for the excesses of freedom to the behavior of the model, the free dignity is easy to be wantonly trampled, originally to people the value of the spirit of never hard to present the implication of beauty.
There is a problem worthy of profound thinking, since the value concept of media freedom is very important, but people in understanding and freedom at the same time, but forget it should assume responsibility, no real freedom, no real responsibility, also no concomitant responsibility freedom must not real freedom. It is not only the question of the media itself, but also a question of political philosophy, that "freedom and responsibility" should be integrated organically.
In the sense of political philosophy, freedom and responsibility should be understood as a unity. However, we often have a different entry point in understanding the relationship between the two. "Freedom and responsibility are twin concepts. But we see two fundamentally different perspectives, from freedom and responsibility to freedom. These are two different perspectives. Actually so that two different and even some conflict point in Chinese academic circles, there has always been in the past, people used to from responsibility to understand the problem, and in recent years, people are accustomed to from the Angle of the right to freedom, or to understand the problem, such as "right standard" put forward by the law in the field of thought, is free from the rights or cut into the position of political philosophy. "These two views embody two different subjectivity, namely the first consciousness and responsibility of the right. Analyzing the operation of these two subjectivity in social life and political life can help us to understand the difference of contemporary Chinese and western political life fundamentally. Freedom in the sense of rights means that people have at least one option in their choice. The key point of the concept of responsibility is that individuals face the future, others and others. The right in the first sense guides the free subjectivity, and advocates in the political life a universal "want option" as the basic right of the person, which is called the power politics. Responsibility with the responsibility of subjectivity consciousness guided earlier, based on the main body of political lives, a deep understanding of other people and the task for the future, for every one of us constantly develop their sense of responsibility, and sense of responsibility for the politicians put forward higher request, this is accountability politics." The best for the understanding of freedom and responsibility should be to freedom and responsibility under the dialectics wisdom to understand that, of course, here said the dialectics is not a so-called objective regularity, but a kind of wisdom, so although it can be to understand dialectics from the theory of knowledge, but in practice often cannot well cognition and grasp of questions. In the relationship between freedom and responsibility, only the wisdom of dialectics, can we truly will be the implementation of the relationship between freedom and responsibility to the reality of the operational level, however, this cannot be narrowly understood as a kind of subjective, and dialectic itself will never understand people's subjective world. Today, with the constant development of the media, from the perspective of dialectic wisdom to understand the media for people's freedom is very important, it is a kind of responsibility for the present understanding of freedom, and the unity of the freedom and responsibility in cognitive premise to obtain the real practice, it will be a process of practice, the relationship between freedom and responsibility will get good in practice. As individuals living in since the media age, while free, to fully realize the responsibility in action, only freedom and responsibility in the unified action, just may let freedom really is a kind of aesthetic value.
Since the behavior of the media is to have boundaries, it is a principle that must be derived from the principle of freedom and responsibility. The act of self-media refers to the use of self-media "human" behavior. In the era of self-media, people who live in it are fundamentally enjoying all the happiness and happiness that freedom gives. But their behavior must have boundary, there is no absolute freedom, freedom never means responsibility, or the limitation of freedom itself must accept responsibility, only in this way can make everyone in the whole society to enjoy real freedom, to feel the real happiness and happiness.
Those who indulge in since the freedom of the media in people tend to ignore the restrictions on freedom and will ignore the border of their actions, cause for the behavior of others of trespass, so law is about to come may interfere, let the freedom and responsibility to get a good balance. The law has become a natural thing for the regulation of self-media, but the law has to consider a boundary question. We know that the law is not of any phenomenon and behavior can be regulated, so the law must understand the "action and" preferring to reason or legal intervention not only can't really promote the order of things and the coordination, it will make the development of things in the direction of the regularity in violation of its own development, causes the destruction of order and harmony. The great philosopher Plato once said, "young people see the elders coming to be quiet. To stand up to give a sign of respect; Be filial to your parents; Also pay attention to hairstyle, robe and shoes; In a word, posture, and so on. There is no problem with the norms that are required for human behavior, and they are recognized in a civilized society, but they cannot be designated as laws. Plato said: "it is foolish to put these rules become law, because, just order into terms written on the paper, the law is not respected, also won't last."
Although the behavior of the media in many respects violates the laws and ethics, it still needs to consider the balance between various values in the regulation of it. Sometimes, in order to restrict tend to "limit" in order to limit, and don't look behind it contains a balance between the diversity of value, such not only can't make good law, and formulate the law will be the value of damage is more noble. On the issues of legal regulation of the media is faced with such problems, on the one hand, it is necessary to regulate the media act, but on the media regulation, may cause damage to the freedom, can make more people for fear of the law and not willing to freely express their opinion, the result may lead to the depression of media, especially since the media truly valuable insight in disappear, it will lose the value the existence of the media itself. As Plato said "all of them like I have said, constantly develop and change in the law, always hope to find a way to put an end to business as well as I said just now that the disadvantages of other aspects, they don't understand, when they do so, they actually equal to cut the head of hydra." Plato's argument can be said to have the value of truth in any field that requires legal regulation. Law to give people more free space, otherwise, it is a kind of damage for free, and only those who are willing and able to really realize the unity of freedom and responsibility sense of people, can only be true in the field of law without intervention to maintain freedom of action and rational.
Since the law is of various media life, involves many legal categories, the law of some related to tort law, some qualitative issues involving intellectual property law, some involving the right of privacy protection, some involving reputation protection, some even crime, for these from the illegal and criminal ACTS in the media, natural need to be legal regulation, to regulate the media life world order, the realization of really protect people's freedom. But when it comes to regulation, we must abide by some basic principles.
Despite the media is a new phenomenon, since the media is in the lives of new problems, new problems but also can be settled with the inherent law must be even in the original legal texts to find specific provision, also can use the legal principles to solve completely, in this case, do not have to make the so-called new laws. There is an academic habit in the field of department law. If there is a problem in social life, it is necessary to perfect or make corresponding laws. The consequences of doing so, not only cannot explain the success of our legal career, just shows that we are the biggest failure of legal workers, because of the inherent law contained if lost its flexibility of inclusive value, it is not a good law. Laws do not frequently develop or modify, social life with each passing day, the essential changes frequently, if a change in law, the law gradually lose their dignity. The frequent revision of laws not only does not promote the development of law, but also can inhibit the realization of the spirit of law, so that the dignity of the law is lost.
In the media in the areas of life, we uphold the principle of a minimum of laws: who can not use the law to solve the problem as far as possible not to use the law to solve them, who can use the existing law to solve the problem, do not have to develop a new law, it is a conform to the legal spirit from the basic principles of media law regulation. For the media in the country, of course, administrative management, also should abide by unless necessary, otherwise it is best not to work on new legislation principles, otherwise, that is the true spirit of freedom, law not only can't really promote the realization of the purpose of the pursuit, contrary purpose extension could suppress the life world.
The link between morality and law in the media of performance is more obvious in life, some problem is just a moral issue, some problem is not only a moral problem, it is still a legal issues, some of the problems, of course, also is only the legal issues. The principle we adhere to here is that we should not use the law to solve problems that can be solved by morality. But it must be able to distinguish between the boundary between morality and law, and sometimes between the two. Some moral issues are purely moral issues, which cannot be translated into legal problems. However, some moral problems can be transformed into legal problems and become the object of legal norms. On the other hand, the law sometimes involves moral issues.
In the media life, many people use the technology condition of the media, through the chat, micro letter form do something immoral, such as which will involve the issue of sex, but if on questions about sex is not involved in the public domain, the moral law is it necessary to intervene? This is a question worth pondering. The author believes that this is only a moral issue, not a problem that can rise to the law. If use the law to excessive intervention in people's life since the media field, may cause a lot of negative effects, even affect the media development to people the value of autonomy and freedom of creation spirit.
Since the freedom of media life is the first, the law should adhere to the basic principle of freedom first in the intervention and regulation of self-media, otherwise it will harm the basic value of mankind. Law of people's life world intervention in general must be modest, an era of laws too expansion must be have a problem, Lao tzu once said "decree zi akira and many thieves", is right, the essence of dialectics of life practice. Since the media is an individual to express their ideas, to interpret their views and ideas with others in communication and exchange platform, life in this world must have a basic legal intervention, namely from the main body in the media in the case of no harm to him, to keep its original freedom, this is the law must ensure the fundamental premise.
It is a balanced idea that the law should adhere to the principle of moderation in the intervention of self-media. Many balance problems involved in the media, between freedom and responsibility to adhere to the principle of a kind of balance, or freedom of extreme will inevitably damage the dignity of the surface is for the sake of the realization of freedom just cannot achieve the effect of freedom, only in a dialectical balance philosophy of life, under the premise of understanding the media can truly achieve the unity of freedom and responsibility. Morality and law of life in the media, to adhere to the principle of a kind of balance between moral excessive intervention of the law, not only cannot promote the development of moral, it will damage the moral nature, inhibit the development of moral. In the media and self-management of life to keep a good balance between the administrative intervention, since the self management should be the dominant media, administrative intervention to the media on the premise of self management, or the destruction of life from the media, only if the concept of balance, under the guidance of be a good idea. Since the legal intervention of the media should adhere to the concept of balance, this is the basic principle derived from the dialectics of the middle way and the rationality of the life world itself.