News
FYI, LOL, or OMG? - Technology's Impact on the Courts and Media
11-17-2008
Forty years later, that refrain is applicable again as society wrestles with the rapid and pervasive changes brought on by technological advances. Most evident in the media, the impact of technology has a ripple effect on our judicial system as well. Because both our courts s and media require the public's trust and confidence if they are to succeed in their public service roles in our democracy, the Reynolds National Center for Courts and Media held a national conference to examine both the impacts and ways both institutions may cope with trust issue in light of the technology changes.
This report is a summary of that conference. At our earliest opportunity, we will place on this site a more comprehensive report of the conference, along with video highlights from the participants.
The conference "FYI, LOL or OMG?: Held in Reno, Nevada November, 17-18, 2008, the conference drew 130 participants to the facilities at The National Judicial College and the Reynolds National Center for Courts and Media. The conference was funded by a generous grant from the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation and was co-sponsored by the Reynolds School of Journalism at the University of Nevada-Reno.
The swirling technology - a keynote address: Because the conference was designed to go beyond the traditional lecture and panel format, the opening session was a discussion between Mitch Ratcliff, a technology journalist, media consultant and blogger in Tacoma, Washington and the audience at the conference. Using the video technology, Mr. Ratcliffe spoke from Tacoma while veteran broadcast media Consultant Peter Shaplen moderated the session with the participants from the audience speaking with via visual teleconferencing. Much of the discussion centered on how online journalists gain the public's acceptance as traditional media grapple with retaining their audiences. Meanwhile, Mr. Shaplen suggested that the courts will need to take a more direct role in telling their stories on their own web sites, rather than relying on traditional media as filters.
Media convergence and the public's trust: Veteran journalist Pam Johnson, executive director of the Reynolds Journalism Institute at the University of Missouri, lead a discussion with federal Judge Marilyn Huff of San Diego and Cathleen Flahardy, editor of Inside Counsel magazine, on the impact bloggers and other online journalists are having on the public's confidence in - or skepticism of - the traditional media. The discussion with the audience often revolved around the problem of what online sources can be relied upon for factual accuracy, behind the commentary.
Changes in the courts: Retired Judge William Dressel, president of The National Judicial College, moderated a panel of Mississippi Supreme Court Justice James Graves, who brought the first high-tech courtroom in his state, and Robert Roper, division director for Judicial Business Integrated with Technology Services for the Colorado Judiciary, on the subject of technology changes in the court system. Designed to acquaint journalists in the audience with how courts are moving from the traditional paper files and in-person hearings to video hearing and electronic files, the discussion examined both the benefits and the drawbacks of the changes. This included length discussions about the concerns of individual privacy in court filings.
Changes in the media: Dean Jerry Ceppos, at the Reynolds School of Journalism at the University of Nevada-Reno served as moderator of a discussion that focused the severe decline in audiences of traditional media. Joined by Judy Nadler, senior fellow for government ethics at the Markkula Center at Santa Clara University, and Hugo Balta, vice president of the National association of Hispanic Journalists and vice president of news and news director of WNJU Telemundo 47 in the New York Metropolitan area, Dean Ceppos outlined the drastic drop in newspaper circulation, newspaper stock values and the resulting cutbacks on editorial staff. Much of this discussion included ways traditional media are seeking ways to shift to the online media audiences.
Break-out groups: To enable participants to share with their professional colleagues what technology changes they were experiencing, three break-out sessions were organized for judges, for journalists and for court administrative personnel.
Impact on judicial ethics - Federal Judge Richard Jones of Seattle, Washington, led a discussion among judges about the difficulties of reacting to online criticism of the courts and individual judge.
Impact on journalism ethics - Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, met with journalists to focus on the seeming absence of even voluntary guidelines for ethical reporting and commentary on the Web. A lingering question was whether the "anything goes" format of online reporting is spilling over into a decline in public confidence in traditional media since many newspapers and broadcast media invite public reaction without editing the public's sometimes outrageous viewpoints.
Court outreach efforts in light of media changes - David Sellers, communications director for the U.S. Administrative Office of the Courts, led a discussion with state and local court public information officers and court administrators on ways in which the court might use the new technologies to reach out to the public. The question is whether the online efforts can help improve the public's understanding of how courts operate and why judicial independence is critical in a democracy.
Business models for the future: Joshua Ross, a consultant on digital business strategy for O'Reilly Media in Sebastopol, California, presented a comprehensive view of the opportunities both the courts and media have in light of the changes. Using examples of companies around the world that shifted gears to their benefit, Ross challenged both the courts and traditional media to look at their operations and processes in new lights.
Text, Lies and Videotape: Paul Anger, editor of the Detroit Free Press, was the featured dinner speaker at the conference, and, with the aid of several slides, provided fascinating detailed about the extensive work that his paper engaged in to root out the truth that led to the downfall of Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. Additionally, Mr. Anger took questions on the future of newspapers in a changing world.
The Virtual Courtroom: Joseph Sawyer, distance learning and technology manager for The National Judicial College Judicial College, moderated a mock hearing session where the judge, the prosecutor, and defense counsel all were in separate locations to provide the a participants with a view of the courts of the future. Then, leading the discussion with the audience, Mr. Sawyer drew out observations that the while technology might enable distance hearings and, and thus save security costs in transferring prisoners to court, there also are drawbacks that would suggest this approach should be used sparingly.
Blogs and their impacts: Dr. Donica Mensing of the Reynolds School of Journalism, was joined by Robert Cox, president of the Media Bloggers Association, Judge Susan Criss of Galveston, Texas, who is one of the few judges in the U.S. with her own blog, and Edward Adams, editor and publisher of the ABA Journal, who revamped the magazine to include a daily news synopsis that includes links to legal blogs. While there was much discussion about the "wild, wild west approach" of some bloggers, there also was acknowledgement that many serious bloggers are providing a valuable watchdog service alerting the public to information affecting their lives. Additionally, the discussion included views on where blogging was headed, but no consensus was reached.
Is it time for regulating the media?: Gary Hengstler, director of the Reynolds National Center for Courts and Media, was joined by Professor David Hazinski of the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Georgia, and Peter Scheer, director of the California First Amendment Coalition, to discuss whether the sweeping impact of online commentary suggests a rethinking of the traditional First Amendment freedoms of speech and press. While no one felt the freedoms now enjoyed should be reduced, many participants acknowledged a degree of discomfort at the use of Internet commentary that often exceeds any boundaries of decency or good taste.
