In some countries, criminal trials are shown on TV and the general public can watch them. Do you think the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
Some countries allow criminal trials to be broadcast for the public to follow. Although this practice may have some shortcomings, I still lean more on its positive side.
On the one hand, giving public access to the trial processes of the court of law is beneficial in various aspects. The details in testimonies of offenders (bị cáo) and the stories from the plaintiffs (nguyên đơn) can give valuable lessons for television viewers to avoid similar danger. Moreover, these programs directly issue warnings to the public of severe consequences of committing crimes, and thus can deter illegal actions or make criminals think twice before their wrongdoings. In addition, getting trials on air (phát sóng các phiên tòa) definitely improves the transparency (tính minh bạch and fairness in the judicial system when final decisions are open to observations and critiques (phê bình) of society.
On the other hand, publicizing criminal trials sometimes cause unwanted reactions in society. The persuasiveness of the jury’s final decision is not always clear-cut, (rõ ràng) which can cause the polarization (sự phân cực) in society about the fairness of the court of law. This somehow can entail (dẫn đến) social instability to some extent when belief of a faction of the population (1 bộ phận trong dân số) in the work of the court is shaky. (lung lay) Moreover, the coverage (thời lượng) for other programs on television is occupied by these trials, thus reducing time for entertainment and advertisement which are major money makers for this medium.
In conclusion, although there are two sides of broadcasting criminal courts on television, I believe the power of education it brings to both alert innocent people and deter potential criminals is stronger than any pitfalls accompanying it.
