Perhaps it is not an exaggeration to say that media jurisprudence is one of the most ambiguous domains of contemporary jurisprudence. It may also be fair to say that the assumption of comprehensive knowledge in media jurisprudence surpasses that of other contemporary jurisprudential domains. Media jurisprudence is both simple and elusive: at first, it appears so clear and straightforward that defining and articulating its essentials seems easy; yet, when one attempts to distinguish it from similar domains and address its unexplored dimensions, it becomes so complex that a precise definition and explanation seem nearly impossible.
Media jurisprudence significantly overlaps with domains such as the jurisprudence of art, culture, and virtual space. Various solutions have been proposed to address this overlap. In the upcoming interviews, some have considered these domains distinct based on their perspectives: art is viewed through the lens of aesthetics, media through the lens of message transmission, culture through the lens of lifestyle and customs, and virtual space through the lens of the cyber environment in which events occur. Others have deferred the answer to a later time when the literature of these jurisprudential domains becomes more developed and their boundaries clearer, while some have sufficed with general statements. If you ask me, however, I would tell you that some issues within these domains cannot be separated by any scholarly means. For instance, does the depiction of a romantic relationship between a man and a woman who are not religiously permissible to each other (namahram) in a performance fall under the jurisprudence of art or media jurisprudence? Is this issue viewed from an aesthetic perspective or from the perspective of message transmission? The answer is: both perspectives! Such individuals are engaged in an act that falls under both their artistic activity and the transmission of a message to the audience. My response to such questions, where perspectives alone are insufficient, is to rely on managerial decisions. Just as jurists have addressed the rulings of travel—which affect both prayer and fasting—within the chapter on prayer and referred readers of the fasting chapter to it, here too, such questions should be assigned to one of these domains through a managerial decision, with a reference to its inclusion in the other domain.
Media jurisprudence, as impactful as it is, also has unexplored dimensions and aspects. For this reason, we have dedicated this magazine to addressing the generalities and broader dimensions of media jurisprudence.
Chapter One: The Nature of Media Jurisprudence and Its Distinction from Similar Domains
In the first chapter of this magazine, we discuss the nature of media jurisprudence and its differences from similar domains, as briefly outlined above. A professor of advanced media jurisprudence (dars-e kharij) at the Tehran Seminary, a professor of media jurisprudence at the IRIB University, and a researcher of media jurisprudence at the Mashhad Seminary have addressed this topic in two interviews and one article.
Chapter Two: Themes and the Network of Issues in Media Jurisprudence
The second chapter explores the themes and network of issues in media jurisprudence to further and more seriously examine its dimensions as a jurisprudential domain. A professor from the Faculty of Communications at Imam Sadiq University and the deputy director of education at the School of Art Jurisprudence have shared their views on this topic in an interview and an article.
Chapter Three: Rules of Media Jurisprudence
At first glance, the rules of media jurisprudence seem more challenging than defining media jurisprudence itself. However, the head of the Research Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudential Studies and the head of the Art and Creative Industries Working Group at the Islamic Research Center of the Parliament have clarified and elaborated on this beyond our expectations. The former addressed the generalities and essentials of media jurisprudential rules, while the latter shared approximately 20 significant and often innovative rules in media jurisprudence with the magazine’s readers.
Chapter Four: Challenges of Media Jurisprudence
The challenges of media jurisprudence constitute one of the most engaging chapters of this magazine. The former head of the Jurisprudence Group at the Islamic Media Research Center, the head of this center, and the director of the School of Art Jurisprudence each articulated these challenges from their own perspectives.
Chapter Five: Methodology of Media Jurisprudence
At first, one might assume that the methodology of media jurisprudence, like that of other jurisprudential domains, offers little beyond the generalities of contemporary jurisprudence. However, Professor Ali Nahavandi, a professor of advanced media jurisprudence, and Hojjat al-Islam Mohammad Eshayari, who has long researched methodology, provided lesser-known insights that make their interviews particularly compelling. A graduate with both a PhD in communications and Level 4 seminary education also shared their perspectives on the methodology of media jurisprudence in an article.
Chapter Six: International Dimensions and Competitive Advantages of Islamic Media Jurisprudence
The sixth chapter discusses the international dimensions of media jurisprudence and the competitive advantages of Islamic media jurisprudence for engagement in the global arena. Dr. Ra’ei, a full professor of international law at Najafabad University, and Dr. Qane’, a faculty member at the Faculty of Communications at Imam Sadiq University, were among the best individuals selected to discuss this chapter’s topic. A faculty member from the Qom Mahallati Faculty also contributed their views in an article, complementing the perspectives of these two professors.
Chapter Seven: Foundations and Assumptions of Media Jurisprudence
The seventh chapter, titled “Foundations and Assumptions of Media Jurisprudence,” is addressed through two interviews and one article.
Chapter Eight: Futurology of Media Jurisprudence
Futurology is a regular feature of the electronic magazines of the Contemporary Jurisprudence Research Institute, and this magazine is no exception. Hojjat al-Islam Mahmoudi and the director of the School of Art Jurisprudence, in an interview and an article, shared their predictions about the future of media jurisprudence—predictions that differ significantly from one another.
Chapter Nine: The History of Media Jurisprudence
The final chapter, in keeping with the tradition of the institute’s electronic magazines, addresses the history of media jurisprudence. This includes an index of jurisprudential media articles, an index of legal media articles, a review of two significant books on media jurisprudence, a bibliography of media jurisprudence, and a report on the most important courses held on media jurisprudence.
In addition to the above, two adapted articles related to the magazine’s theme were included among the content to enhance the magazine’s scholarly richness.
Ultimately, this magazine aims to explore the broader dimensions of media jurisprudence with a meta-perspective, serving as an initial step toward serious and sustained research in this vital and impactful domain of contemporary jurisprudence.