Twitter in the Courtroom : Do You Object ?
V . ARGUMENTS AGAINST TWITTER USE
Many opposed to broadcasting courtroom proceedings have argued that allowing reporters to tweet will harm participants ’ due process and privacy rights . The fundamental concern is that tweeting will result in too much transparency . An individual ' s willingness to testify before a judge or jury may be impacted by the scope of media coverage and will therefore affect an individual ’ s willingness to file a claim or testify . 36 Claimants and witnesses may shy away from coming forward for fear that their name , reputation , or testimony could be the subject of a tweet that results in public ridicule .
Concern over the tweeting of sensitive information during the course of a trial is another argument against its use . This apprehension was apparent during the criminal prosecution of Jerry Sandusky . Presiding Judge John Cleland agreed to allow reporters to tweet news updates . He later reversed that decision after confusion over what he meant in his prohibition against tweeting verbatim testimony . 37 Fearing that improper information would be disseminated , the judge subsequently withdrew his original consent . 38 “ Reporters were thereafter allowed to possess and use electronic devices but not to transmit any type of communication from the courtroom , they could not therefore tweet .” 39
Further criticism against the use of Twitter stems from apprehension that allowing broadcasting during trial will result in the obstruction of justice through juror misconduct . 40
36 Cervantes , supra , at 151 . 37 Winnick , supra , at 347 . 38 Id . 39 Ittner supra , at 367 . 40 Cervantes , supra , at 153 .
11