Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Twitter in Court

A judge has allowed people to use Twitter in court on the grounds that "The use of an unobtrusive, hand-held, virtually silent piece of modern equipment for the purposes of simultaneous reporting of proceedings to the outside world as they unfold in court is unlikely to interfere with the proper administration of justice."

Apparently, video and sound recordings aren't allowed, even though these recordings can be made with equipment just as unobtrusive (or even more so) as the things people tweet with.

Should tweeting be allowed? How about video and sound? Video and sound would be more accurate, but could compromise people's anonymity.

Reply 1

Liam 09

Sounds like a bit of a twit :awesome:

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 2

darigan

I'm happy for twitter to be allowed - Currently (or well, at least before the twitter thing), while video and sound recording is not allowed, journalists do take notes, and then write their stories off the back of those notes. Twitter allows those notes to be instantly broadcast.

Obv. the Journos still have to abide by court reporting rules such as annonymity where appropriate etc. etc.

I would also be in favour of video and sound recording as long as it did not disrupt the legal process, and as long as the case was not one where annonymity was required (cases involving minors etc.)

Anyways, I'm happy for it to be allowed providing the journalists exercise the requisite responsibility, but I'm sure some people will feel differently