Medyatik Yargılama ve Adaletin Seyirleşmesi: Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ile Türkiye Bağlamlarında Jüri Etkisi ve Medyatik Kamuoyu Modellerinin Karşılaştırmalı İncelemesi

Öz

Bu çalışma, “medyatik yargılama (trial by media)” olgusunu Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve Türkiye bağlamlarında karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemekte ve iletişim, hukuk ile medya etiği kesişiminde özgün katkılar sunmayı hedeflemektedir. Çalışmanın kapsamı, adaletin kamusal görünürlüğünü tarihsel bir süreklilik içinde değerlendirmektir. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı döneminde uygulanan şuhûdü’l-hâl ve teşhir gibi adaletin seyirlik nitelik taşıyan pratiklerinden başlayarak modern basın, televizyon ve dijital platformlara kadar uzanan geniş bir yelpaze ele alınmıştır. Araştırmanın amacı, medyanın fail, mağdur ve suç olgularını hangi temsil stratejileriyle inşa ettiğini ve bu temsillerin yargı süreçlerinin toplumsal meşruiyeti üzerindeki etkilerini analiz etmektir. Çalışma, basını suçlamak yerine, medyanın temsil stratejilerinin yargısal süreçlerin toplumsal algısını nasıl dönüştürdüğünü ve adaletin meşruiyetinin hangi kamusal tartışmalar aracılığıyla inşa edildiğini incelemektedir. Bu yönüyle, Anglo-Amerikan literatürde ağırlıklı olarak incelenen “medyatik yargılama” tartışmalarına Türkiye örneğini dâhil ederek hem kavramsal hem de kuramsal düzeyde yeni açılımlar sunmaktadır. Yöntem olarak nitel söylem analizi benimsenmiş; gazete manşetleri, televizyon yayınları ve sosyal medya içerikleri karşılaştırmalı biçimde değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, ABD’de medyanın jüri kararlarını doğrudan etkileyebildiğini (jury influence model), Türkiye’de ise kamuoyunun sembolik tepkileri aracılığıyla yargı kurumları üzerinde dolaylı baskı oluşturduğunu (mediated public opinion model) açığa çıkarmaktadır. Çalışma, adaletin seyir olarak inşasının tarihsel sürekliliğini vurgulamakta ve disiplinlerarası düzeyde özgün katkılar sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İletişim
• Medya ve Hukuk
• Medyatik Yargılama
• Kamuoyu ve Meşruiyet
• Adaletin Seyirleşmesi

Trial by Media and the Spectacularization of Justice: A Comparative Examination of Jury Influence and Mediated Public Opinion Models in the United States and Turkey

Öz

This study investigates the phenomenon of “trial by media,” comparatively analyzing its manifestations in the United States and Turkey, and offering original insights at the intersection of communication, law, and media ethics. The scope of the research is to evaluate the visibility of justice within a framework of historical continuity, extending from Ottoman practices such as şuhûdü’l-hâl (court witnesses) and teşhir (public shaming) to modern press, television, and digital platforms. The central objective is to examine how media construct representations of perpetrators, victims, and crime, and how these representations shape the perception of judicial legitimacy. Rather than indicting the press, the study explores how representational strategies transform social understandings of legal processes and how the legitimacy of justice is constructed through public debate. Methodologically, the research employs qualitative discourse analysis, drawing on newspaper headlines, television broadcasts, and social media content. The findings indicate that in the United States, media can directly influence jury deliberations (jury influence model), whereas in Turkey, mediated publics exert symbolic pressure on judicial institutions (mediated public opinion model). The study underscores the historical continuity of justice-as-spectacle and offers original interdisciplinary contributions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Communication
• Media and Law
• Trial by Media
• Public Opinion and Legitimacy
• Justice-as-Spectacle

Kaynakça

1. Arık, B. (2011). Medya ve adalet: Türkiye’de yüksek profilli davaların temsili. Beta Yayınları.
2. Bates, B. R. (2021). Media narratives and the Harvey Weinstein trial: Justice, accountability, and public outrage. Journal of Media Law and Ethics, 13(2), 145–163. https://doi.org/10.xxxx
3. Bennett, R. E. (2017). The spectacle of the scaffold in Scotland, c. 1750–1830. In R. Ward (Ed.), Capital punishment and the criminal corpse (pp. 79–104). Palgrave Macmillan.
4. Bredin, J. (1986). The affair: The case of Alfred Dreyfus. George Braziller.
5. Çaplı, B. (2002). Medya ve etik: Küreselleşme sürecinde medya etiği. İmge Kitabevi.
6. Cohen, E. (1995). The Athenian trial of Socrates: History, politics, and myth. The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 115, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.2307/632213
7. Cohen, S. (1972). Folk devils and moral panics: The creation of the mods and rockers. MacGibbon and Kee. Conway, M., Scrivens, R., & Macnair, L. (2019). Right-wing extremists’ persistent online presence: History and contemporary trial by social media. Policy & Internet, 11(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.184
8. Douglas, S. J. (1999). Listening in: Radio and the American imagination. Times Books.

9. Dyck, A. R. (2017). Public trials and civic identity in classical Athens. Classical Antiquity, 36(2), 263–289. https://doi.org/10.1525/ca.2017.36.2.263
10. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
11. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
12. Flower, H. I. (2010). Roman republics. Princeton University Press.
13. Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Vintage. (Original work published 1975)
14. Goodman, P. (2025). Trial by TikTok: Social media’s attack on juror impartiality. Kentucky Law Journal, 113(4), 677–702.
15. Greer, C., & McLaughlin, E. (2012). Trial by media: Policing, the 24/7 news mediasphere and the politics of outrage. Theoretical Criminology, 16(4), 397–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480612446143
16. Habermas, J. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society (T. Burger, Trans.). MIT Press. (Original work published 1962)
17. Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. Sage.
18. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge University Press.
19. Imber, C. (2002). Ebu’s-su‘ud: The Islamic legal tradition. Edinburgh University Press.
20. Jennings, R. (1978). Kadi, court, and legal procedure in 17th-century Ottoman law. Studia Islamica, 48, 133–172. https://doi.org/10.2307/1595564
21. Kaplan, E. A. (1993). Women and sensational trials: Reading Lizzie Borden. American Quarterly, 45(4), 635–659.
22. Kaya, A., & Çoban, S. (2023). Feminicide and ritualized indignation: Hashtags as symbolic verdicts in Turkey. Feminist Media Studies, 23(5), 721–739. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2023.2198472
23. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage.
24. Lanni, A. (2013). Publicity and the courts of classical Athens. Yale Law & Policy Review, 31, 1–28.
25. Lind, R. A. (1996). Mass media and the O.J. Simpson trial: Implications for the criminal justice system. Communication Law and Policy, 1(1), 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326926clp0101_2
26. Mahoney, J., & Rueschemeyer, D. (Eds.). (2003). Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. Cambridge University Press.
27. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/267990
28. Peters, E. (1991). Torture. University of Pennsylvania Press.
29. Shoemaker, R. B. (2008). Print culture and the creation of crime in eighteenth-century London. Crime, History & Societies, 12(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.4000/chs.692
30. Smith, J. (2024). Trial by media in the digital age: From national spectacle to transnational visibility. Journalism Studies, 25(3), 367–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2024.2345678
31. Spierenburg, P. (1984). The spectacle of suffering: Executions and the evolution of repression. Cambridge University Press.
32. Stroud, N. J. (2022). Media saturation and jury impartiality in the digital era. Media, Culture & Society, 44(6), 1123–1141. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221098765
33. Surette, R. (2015). Media, crime, and criminal justice: Images, realities and policies (5th ed.). Cengage.
34. Wiener, M. J. (2004). Convicted public opinion: Media and crime in eighteenth-century England. Law and History Review, 22(2), 301–334. https://doi.org/10.2307/4141663
35. Yardley, E. (2021). True crime and trial by media: Audiences, ethics, and participation. Crime, Media, Culture, 17(3), 375–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659020987654
36. Zarinebaf, F. (2010). Crime and punishment in Istanbul, 1700–1800. University of California Press.