About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

10 Just. Sys. J. 279 (1985)
Televised Trials: Weighing Advantages against Disadvantages

handle is hein.journals/jusj10 and id is 281 raw text is: TELEVISED TRIALS: WEIGHING ADVANTAGES AGAINST DISADVANTAGES SUSANNA R. BARBER* Recent arguments over televised trials juxtapose purported advantages- education about judicial process, restoration of public confidence in the courts, and crime deterrent value-against potential disadvantages-increased prejudicial publicity and public embarrassment of defendants. Although no empirical research has been conducted to test either hypothesis, anecdotal evidence-concerned with news viewing motivation and attention, news recall and retention, and television's function in shaping public perceptions and public opinions-can be used to weigh the arguments. This information suggests that the reasons why audiences fail to learn from television news viewing may be the very same reasons why its potential harm to defendants is less severe than has been predicted. Information about cases and defendants who are televised may be forgotten quickly. However, recall of information may be improved by watching gavel-to-gavel televised trials, and studies suggest that such coverage may reinforce negative public attitudes toward criminals, and encourage retributive attitudes concerning punishment. A risk then, is that just as greater detail may enhance the educational value of televising trials, it may also increase potential harm to defendants. Future research, applying the legal qualitative difference test, should compare the impact of newspaper and televised trial coverage, and attention should also be paid to the influence of gavel-to-gavel versus excerpted trial coverage. Introduction After nearly 70 years of courtroom cameras experience, and ten years of empirical interest in the question of whether trials should be televised, crucial issues surrounding the courtroom cameras debate focus on the audience. This audience approach to the debate juxtaposes purported advantages of televised trials-restoration of public confidence in the courts and crime deterrent value-against potential due process dis- advantages-increased prejudicial publicity and public embarrassment of defendants.1 At the heart of this debate is the premise that accrual of the *Associate Professor of Mass Communication, Emerson College. 1. Present discussion is limited to the possible results of televising criminal cases, since these were the focus of U.S. Supreme Court landmark courtroom cameras decisions and continue to be the focus of major dispute over televised trials. See: Chandler v. Florida (1981); Estes v. Texas (1965). Harm to defendants is, of course, not the only potentially dangerous consequence of televised trials. Invasion of witness privacy (particularly victims of physi- cal or sexual abuse); protection of juror anonymity; and negative impacts on viewers (especially children in the audience) are equally compelling considerations. The scope of the present discussion is limited to defendants, but these other considerations have been discussed by Barber (1985). THE JUSTICE SYSTEM JOURNAL, Volume 10, Number 3 1985

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most