“媒介审判”（trial by media）是指新闻媒介超越正常的司法程序对被报道对象所作的一种先在性的“审判预设”。它是新闻竞争日趋激烈下的产物，从法理学的视角看，“媒介审判”损害媒体作为社会公器的形象，是新闻媒体的职能错位，它使得司法独立和新闻自由的天平过分倾斜，有悖于法治精神。

“媒介审判”的原初法律涵义西方学者认为：“媒介审判”是一种不是依据法律程序对被告或犯罪嫌疑人实施的非法的道义上的裁判，也叫“报刊裁判”（trial by news paper）。它的历史沿革是西方国家的法律审判实行大陪审团制度，陪审团由普通公民组成，如果大众传媒在开庭审判前就对案件或涉案的当事人做过多的报道和渲染，就会影响陪审团的公正投票，从而间接影响判决的公允。

典型的案例是：上个世纪中叶发生在美国的“谢帕德案件”。1954年6月4日美国的一个外科医生谢帕德（SamSheppard）被指控谋杀自己的妻子的凶手。由于当时在事发现场没有留下任何线索，使得案情无法开展。但是，民众和媒体的合理想象认定谢帕德医生是杀死其妻子的凶手。媒体为了炒作的需要，不断制造新闻，以此来刺激受众情绪，致使法院最终裁定谢帕德医生有罪。作为无辜的受害者谢帕德医生每年上诉，一直上诉了十二年，屡次被法院驳回。直到1965年，美国最高法院接受谢帕德医生的请求，重新审判，被判无罪。

我国学者魏永征认为，“媒介审判”是指新闻媒介超越司法程序，抢先对涉案人员做出定性、定罪、定刑以及胜诉或败诉等结论。“媒介审判”是对法院的审判权和犯罪嫌疑人的公民权利的双重侵犯。

“媒介审判”的英文解释：

Trial by media is a phrase popular in the late 20th century and early 21st century to describe the impact of television and newspaper coverage on a person's reputation by creating a widespread perception of guilt regardless of any verdict in a court of law.

In the United Kingdom there is a heated debate between those who support a free press which is largely uncensored and those who point to an individuals' right to privacy regardless of what they may have done wrong.

During high publicity court cases the media is often accused of provoking an atmosphere of public hysteria akin to a lynch mob which not only makes a fair trial nearly impossible but means that regardless of the result of the trial the accused will not be able to live the rest of their life without being hounded at every turn.

The counter-argument is that the mob mentality exists independently of the media which merely voices the opinions which the public already has.

There are different reasons why the media attention is particularly intense surrounding a legal case: the first is that the crime itself is in some way sensational, by being horrific or involving children; the second is that it involves a celebrity either as victim or accused.