Cameras in the Courtroom?

    I was all for cameras in the courtroom. Openness, sunshine, let the people see and know what's going on. All that.
   Now that these trials become the main source of entertainment on our news stations, now that they dominate the coverage to the detriment of coverage of other topics, I'm having second thoughts. It's cheap to broadcast, it draws ratings, and for that, it's too tempting for news outfits to spend far too much time on them. We've turned murder trials into circuses for profit, fame and distraction. It's become a jobs program for lawyers, judges, and defendants to get famous.
   I think it's time to rethink it. We can be informed without having to have a front seat. Maybe we could dedicate all of it to one cable channel, like C-SPAN for trials, but the temptation is too strong to monetize it. I'm not convinced that either justice or an informed public is served. I think it's the opposite.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I disagree. The Zimmerman trial, for instance, was a cause celbre way before the trial. At least with it being public, the public is being informed as to how the verdict was decided. I think the best part of trials being so public, is now we know how jurors are selected...which as we hve been seeing are usually the most uninformed, incurious, don't care about the world, bunch of people that exist.
July 19, 2013 at 4:34 PM
Unknown said…
I tend to be of two minds on this. One, as I mentioned before, I think we could have a cable station like C-SPAN dedicated to trials.
The other is that this isn't about informing people so much as a revenue center for "news" organizations that use it as cover and distraction to keep us from noticing they aren't really covering or investigating other, more important, stories because they're difficult, expensive, or go against the grain, or are damaging to the bottom line, of their corporate heads.
July 19, 2013 at 6:19 PM
Unknown said…
That being said, this particular case has so many other issues intertwined with it. The "guilty or innocent" result of the show and trial itself is less consequential than the surrounding issues of gun rights, racism, Constitutional questions, police malfeasance, press bias, and what the fuck is wrong with Florida, among others.
July 19, 2013 at 6:24 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Your Intrepid Reporter is Eye-Ball Deep in it Again

Image
This whole mess can be found here. David Betras July 1 at 3:19pm · Youngstown, OH · This is what I found most objectionable in yesterdays decision besides the woman's issue. the Supreme Court found that closely held corporation are equivalent to a person under the constitution. this has far reaching consequences. Like Like · · Share Roger M. Chamberlain , Mona Rouser , Leo Jennings and 30 others like this. 1 share Maggie Wellington Just you wait...... July 1 at 3:28pm · Like Veronica Lowe Salreno I agree. This is just the beginning. July 1 at 3:46pm · Like Ron Solove Does it follow that the corporate veil is gone for closely-helds? Seems logical. July 1 at 3:49pm · Like Ryan Neely i read viagra and other male "enhancements" are covered. July 1 at 3:57pm · Like · 1 Debbie Donatelli Ryan Does that surprise you!? July 1 at 4:00pm · Like
Read more

Vershire School

Image
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/04/05/us/education-vermont-seeks-tighter-rules-for-prviate-schools.html We made the New York Times http://marthamoxley.com/news/042802gt.htm And our OTHER claim to infamy : Micheal Skakel and the Moxley murder This was one of the places I went to school. A very unique place in a very unique time. Pictured, the dining hall in the main building, "The Lodge", and a few years after the place closed down. For Vershireites with foggy memories (for whatever reasons), or nostalgia: http://web.archive.org/web/20080624190520/http://www.vershireschool.org/ I think Chip Allee put this together, but it's no longer maintained.
Read more

Bad Guys, Good Guys, and Critical Thinking

Image
  Bad guys can convince most of a nation that they're the good guys. Happens all the time. It's why we have advertizing, and why TV ads are so powerful. They can lie straight to you and make you believe they're the most honest people on the planet.   The only bulwark against that is critical thinking. Experiment, observation, reason. Not a preacher's authority, not what "feels right".  And, most definitely NOT authority.   We can get the Bush White House telling us Hussein was part of Al Quaida, and that cutting taxes on "job creators" is the route to a strong economy.   BP can run all the ads they want about how they're helping the Gulf come back, but they're doing everything they can to not spend a penny more than they're legally obligated to unless it's in PR dollars. When they do their job right, you almost forget that the damage was due to their criminal negligence.    The Koch brothers can hide all their ads and pr
Read more