Research on Legal Risks and Governance Paths of Legal Online Public Opinion

The development of internet platforms has led to the fragmentation, multi-platform linkage, and emotional diffusion of legal information dissemination. This not only broadens the channels for public participation and supervision but may also result in legal norms losing their context, distorted case facts, and the spread of violent and inflammatory expressions. This paper takes the legal discourse alienation and violent expressions in legal online public opinion as the entry point, and based on existing research, analyzes their manifestations, generation mechanisms, and legal risks. The study holds that legal discourse alienation mainly manifests as context-cutting, fact omission, re-narration concatenation, and analogy abuse, and its formation is related to the fragmentation of online dissemination, the tension between public moral judgment and legal professional logic, and the information distribution mechanism of the platform; violent and inflammatory expressions may increase the risk of transformation from online expression to offline behavior under the influence of factors such as group polarization, but whether they enter legal evaluation, especially criminal law evaluation, should be judged on a case-by-case basis by considering subjective intent, expression content, communication targets, real danger, and their correlation with specific crimes. Therefore, in order to achieve a balance between social protection and freedom of speech, it is necessary to ensure normal criticism and public opinion supervision, and through strengthening authoritative legal information supply, improving platform information governance, improving risk monitoring and early warning, and exercising caution in connecting criminal law regulation, it is possible to achieve a balance between social protection and legal regulation in online legal public opinion governance.