Seeing justice done: Courtroom filming and the deceptions of transparency

Abstract

There has been a global shift towards courtroom broadcasting in a bid to extend the public gallery into a virtual realm. Such initiatives tend to be based on the idea that transmitting the courtroom boosts transparency and with it public trust in criminal justice. This is an untested ambition. Moreover, the idea that filming opens a window onto the courtroom comes up against the reality that any transmission entails translation, involving choices and compromises. Based on an in-depth study of courtroom filming and audience response, this article identifies two globally dominant stylistic modes and analyses their meaning and reception. We found that different stylistic modes prompt different types of audience engagement and allow for different levels of comprehension. The analysis therefore provides an insight into how courtroom footage is consumed by the viewing public. It also contributes to our understanding of the norms and values of institutional transparency.

The criminal trial as a live event: Exploring how and why live blogs change the professional practices of judges, defence lawyers and prosecutors

“…We argue that live blogs, much like televised trials, extend ‘the public gallery into a virtual realm’ (Moore et al, 2021: 1). Live blogs therefore widen or dematerialize the courtroom meaning that physical presence can be replaced by virtual presence.…”

“…Furthermore, although a summary, or record of proceedings – also known as the court record – is written during trials in Denmark and Sweden, neither country has a verbatim account of what has taken place thereby contrasting with other jurisdictions, for instance in Federal Courts in the U.S. where proceedings are recorded word-for-word (The Court Reporter Statute, 2010). Moreover, television cameras are not permitted in Danish or Swedish criminal courtrooms (see Moore et al, 2021 for an overview of which countries permit live filming; also Packer, 2013). This means that in Denmark and Sweden a live blog may constitute the most detailed depiction of events making it a pertinent point of academic enquiry regarding how legal professionals interact with such reports.…”

The ‘most maligned’ witness in the Christopher Dawson case: Gender, power, media and legal culture in the digitally distributed live-streamed court

“…Recent research from a gender-based perspective has included a detailed analysis of the cultural, legal and media industry structures driving news production in specific fields including domestic violence (Blatchford and Morgan, 2020) and sexual violence (Waterhouse-Watson, 2019). But so far, this nuanced field-specific gender-based research has not encompassed the court’s own rapidly expanding media technologies, a theme that has been taken up more broadly in socio-legal studies with a focus on the rapid expansion of filmed and livestreamed court hearings (Johnston, 2018; Moore et al, 2021).…”

“…This digitally distributed courtroom may look and feel raw and therefore ‘authentic’ but it’s actually carefully staged (Moore et al, 2021). For the media industry, the court’s livestream is well-adapted to the efficient manufacture of news stories in a fast-moving news cycle, allowing teams of reporters to gather and disperse in response to the perceived newsworthiness of the content, allowing stories to be written, subbed, edited, approved and published, without even leaving the newsroom.…”