| Sumario: | Media jurisprudence regulates media performance by determining its legal rulings. These rulings are derived from scriptural, transmitted, and rational evidences, and they guide media orientation in both policymaking and operational practice. Qur’anic verses and prophetic traditions are regarded as primary sources for juristic inference. Rational reasoning (ʿaql) also serves as a guiding tool in cases where no explicit textual evidence exists, helping to clarify legal rulings. In media jurisprudence, various rational foundations can be employed to derive rulings related to media activities. This study, conducted using a descriptive-analytical method and based on library resources and relevant software tools, seeks to explain and analyze rational principles relevant to the media domain and the rulings derived from them. The findings indicate that multiple rational principles can be used to develop media jurisprudence in different areas. Based on the rational principle of justice, it is necessary to ensure balance in information dissemination, respect audience rights, and avoid discrimination or unfair bias. Based on the principle of avoiding probable harm, it is necessary to enable informed audience choice, critical content analysis, reduction of misinformation and rumors, and preservation of public trust. Based on the rational principle of contradiction, it is necessary to avoid contradictory news that leads to confusion in audience understanding. According to the principle of "prohibition as a precursor to prohibition," preventive measures are required to control and guide media messages toward their proper direction, thereby preserving media credibility. According to the principle of "obligation as a precursor to obligation," necessary prerequisites must be observed to strengthen and complete media effectiveness. Finally, based on the principle of prioritization, it is necessary to determine priorities in media missions across different domains, thereby enhancing audience satisfaction.
|
|---|