"New Media" and the Courts

Results from a first-of-its-kind nationwide survey on "new media" and the courts made public late last month suggest that "state judges and court staff recognize the potential impact of social media on the administration of justice and are taking a close look at both the ramifications and opportunities."

The survey findings were part of a year-long national collaborative research project conducted by the Conference of Court Public Information Officers, an organization of more than 100 communications professionals working in state and federal courts in the United States and worldwide, which for the first time measured the impact of new media on the courts, and identified the cautious approach courts have taken toward new media because of the effects on ethics, court proceedings and the ability of these new communication tools to support public understanding of the courts.

Their press release stated that "While only a fraction of courts around the country have established their own social networking sites, almost all the respondents agreed that judges and court employees needed to be educated about the so-called ―'new media'---from Facebook and Twitter to smart phones---and learn how their use might one day impact day to day operations in their courthouses."

The report itself addressed three "areas of study" (effects on court proceedings, possible effects on ethical considerations for judges & court employees, and effects on courts’ ability to promote understanding & public trust and confidence in the court system).

Likewise, the report identified & explored in detail, seven categories of "new media" technology impacting the courts:

• Social media profile sites such as Facebook and MySpace


• Microblogging sites such as Twitter


• Smart phones, tablets & notebooks, including Droid and Blackberry


• Monitoring sites such as Google’s social search that "include the large and increasing body of sites that aggregate information about Internet traffic patterns andwhat is posted on social media sites, displaying analyses of how a particular entityis portrayed or understood by the public."


• News categorizing, sharing & syndicating sites including blogs, RSS, Digg, and del.iciou.us


• Visual media sharing sites such as YouTube and Flickr


• Wikis."Websites that allow for the easy creation and editing of multiple interlinked Web pages via a Web browser using a simplified markup language or 'WYSIWYG' (what-you-see-is-what-you-get) text editor." Wikipedia is the best known of these.

The Ohio Bar Association last May approved a new jury instruction to limit access to new media while Ohioans serve on juries, advising jurors not to obtain any information about a criminal or civil trial from outside sources such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube or their iPhone while serving on a jury. A Supreme Court announcement at that time said "before a trial begins, jurors are warned to refrain from discussing a case and seeking outside information about a case and to limit their knowledge about the facts of the case to what is presented in court," making note of the yet to be completed above study.

Last week it reported that "at least one Ohio court has found success using one of these tools and other new media technology.” The Ninth District Court of Appeals opened a Twitter account in 2009 and started its own blog in July. Last week, it unveiled an application Court Administrator C. Michael Walsh developed for Android-based smart phones that will give driving directions to the courts, provide access to the court’s local rules, and allow for one-touch calling to the clerks of court in each of the district’s four counties (Lorain, Medina, Summit and Wayne). It also includes links to the court’s Web site, for the Supreme Court of Ohio, and the clerks of court for the four counties.

"New Media and the Courts - The Current Status and a Look at the Future" [ executive summary ]
[ full report ]