1. Should cameras be allowed in the courtroom? Why or why not? What are the advantages and disadvantages? What are the laws or policies covering this issue?
How much transparency is too much? At what point does transparency begin to have a negative effect on the criminal justice system? From social media to network news, most people in America get their news and information from this form of media. However, it is important to examine if the people's right to know has a negative effect on due process. There are many pro and cons to cameras in the courtroom. They can serve many purposes, the justification of which can depend on which side of the argument you find yourself on. I myself am of the opinion that they are not needed in the courtroom, …show more content…
However, since the 1990's attitudes have changed so much that now 35 states allow electronic coverage of trials at their discretion (Peak, 2014, p. 219). The U.S Supreme Court however still does not allow cameras in their proceedings (Cameras in Courtrooms). There are many arguments in favor of and against cameras in a courtroom. Some of the advantages of televising a trial include educating the public on the court process, holding people who are part of a trial accountable for their behavior, and supporting a person's right to know by making a court's proceeding available for viewing. In theory it is a good idea. In practice, however, these feeds used out of context to sway public opinion and provide biased coverage of a trial, rather than inform (Peak, 2014, p. 218). It can also lead some courtroom players to play to the camera, while making others feel intimidated by them. Additionally, camera crews can be a distraction to some trying to concentrate on the information being …show more content…
The power of the media is a thing not to be taken lightly. We have seen their influence on criminal cases time and time again. The most famous case that comes to mind is the People of CA. v O.J. Simpson. Due to the trial being aired on primetime television, the defendant's defense team was able to turn the courtroom in to a circus. They swayed public opinion through the use of the media and were able to make the case about the corruption in the LAPD, diverting the juries focus from the facts. Even with hard evidence against the defendant, the defense was able to use public opinion and the bad reputation of the LAPD to have Mr. Simpson to be found innocent. This was done through a powerful medium and that medium was
How much transparency is too much? At what point does transparency begin to have a negative effect on the criminal justice system? From social media to network news, most people in America get their news and information from this form of media. However, it is important to examine if the people's right to know has a negative effect on due process. There are many pro and cons to cameras in the courtroom. They can serve many purposes, the justification of which can depend on which side of the argument you find yourself on. I myself am of the opinion that they are not needed in the courtroom, …show more content…
However, since the 1990's attitudes have changed so much that now 35 states allow electronic coverage of trials at their discretion (Peak, 2014, p. 219). The U.S Supreme Court however still does not allow cameras in their proceedings (Cameras in Courtrooms). There are many arguments in favor of and against cameras in a courtroom. Some of the advantages of televising a trial include educating the public on the court process, holding people who are part of a trial accountable for their behavior, and supporting a person's right to know by making a court's proceeding available for viewing. In theory it is a good idea. In practice, however, these feeds used out of context to sway public opinion and provide biased coverage of a trial, rather than inform (Peak, 2014, p. 218). It can also lead some courtroom players to play to the camera, while making others feel intimidated by them. Additionally, camera crews can be a distraction to some trying to concentrate on the information being …show more content…
The power of the media is a thing not to be taken lightly. We have seen their influence on criminal cases time and time again. The most famous case that comes to mind is the People of CA. v O.J. Simpson. Due to the trial being aired on primetime television, the defendant's defense team was able to turn the courtroom in to a circus. They swayed public opinion through the use of the media and were able to make the case about the corruption in the LAPD, diverting the juries focus from the facts. Even with hard evidence against the defendant, the defense was able to use public opinion and the bad reputation of the LAPD to have Mr. Simpson to be found innocent. This was done through a powerful medium and that medium was