From cameras in the courtrooms to broadcasting every detail of a trial on the six o'clock news, the media has increasingly gained access to every aspect of the judicial system. Cases such as O.J. Simpson, Duke Lacrosse, and West Memphis all produced mass hysteria facilitated by media overexposure. But does increased media coverage correlate to an increase in justice? Or just TV ratings? Long before many defendants enter a courtroom in today's technologically inclined world, they are already tried and convicted by public opinion. However, news exposure does not have to hinder a case but can also give an unmerited advantage if the public empathizes with the defendant. Mass media coverage of court cases and trials can imprint enduring images (p.60) into the minds of potential jurors eliminating the chances of a fair trial. The sixth amendment guarantees the accused the “right to a public trial,” but does not explicitly grant the public access to the actual trial proceedings. And the first amendment secures the media’s freedom of the press, but does not purport that the media be given government information to generate news. To advocate the elimination of news coverage of the justice system would be asking for the impossible; however, media access to trial proceedings must be reduced because a person’s guilt or innocence should be determined in a legal courtroom, not in the court of public opinion with the media as the presiding judge.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think the media's involvement in legal trials is a very sensitive one. On one hand the media does have the right to report on any trial it chooses. However, they clearly do impart some bias on the general population. The OJ trial became a zoo due to excessive media coverage. Finding an unbiased jury would be hard because of slanted coverage of high-profile cases. One interesting point is that media coverage of cases can be a good thing. How else would we know about complete miscarriages of justice like the Jena 6? In cases like that it was very beneficial to have the news report about it heavily. So if you limit media access to trials, you could possibly miss out on some positive situations. In a perfect world, news would be completely unbiased, but that obviously is not the case.
Post a Comment