Technology considerations
Equipment
Cameras & pool – The court should communicate its position on cameras in the courtroom and outline the process for requesting access via the PIO or designated spokesperson. Decisions regarding the number, type, and location of video and still cameras should be made before the proceedings begin. Decisions regarding pool coverage should also be made in advance. When designating pool coverage, the court should consider a media organization’s equipment and staffing capabilities since they will be responsible for sharing footage with all interested parties. The media organization designated as the pool representative must fulfill all assigned obligations and responsibilities in a timely manner. If cameras are not permitted, the media may request access for a courtroom artist, which is paid for by the media. (Examples: Florida Rule of Judicial Administration, Rule 2.450 and Minnesota Cameras in the Courtroom and General Rules of Practice for District Courts, Rule 4)
Internal/house feeds – Media organizations may request access to the court’s in-house audio/video feed and/or digital court reporting system. Court officials need to carefully evaluate these requests and be prepared to respond in a timely fashion.
Microphones – Media organizations may request that additional microphones be positioned in the courtroom to improve sound quality. Potential locations may include the judge’s bench, jury box, counsel tables, and the bar. Again, the court should carefully consider these requests and be prepared to respond quickly.
Connectivity – WiFi signal access, ethernet, and hotspot access are important for effective media coverage. Courts should consider steps to increase their capabilities to support the additional burden created during high-profile cases. Read more about IT for external communications.
Filming and recording restrictions
The court should rely on court orders and rules to determine any limitations on identifying/photographing jurors, minors, victims of sexual abuse, or other vulnerable populations. The same determinations should be made for recording bench conferences, closed proceedings, or other arguments made outside of the jury’s presence.
The court should have a clear understanding of how video footage will be used and when it will air. Livestream coverage is just that, while televised video is broadcast at a delayed time.
Decisions should be made in advance about filming in public spaces (i.e., courthouse exteriors, hallways, building entrance, etc.). The court must consider courthouse security, privacy concerns and the overall impact on other court business. These locations are typically used by the media for standup/live broadcasts.
Any restrictions and prohibitions should be clearly communicated to all media prior to trial/hearing. (Example: State v. Chauvin, Order Allowing Audio and Video Coverage of Trial)
Records and exhibits
Frequently asked questions (FAQs) or one-pagers can help the media understand the availability of public records, exhibits, and evidence while also identifying record custodians and any requirements for making requests.
Some courts create web pages for high-profile cases to centralize information and records while also reducing the number of individual inquiries to staff. Be sure to have documents reviewed by knowledgeable court staff for potential redaction prior to web publication. (Example: State v. Chauvin, Documents
Media representatives will also seek access to exhibits. The court should determine how and where access will take place – either via a feed from the courtroom evidence presentation platform, posting to the web, or after the day’s proceedings/conclusion of the case. (Example: State v. Chauvin, Exhibit Access, State v. Murdaugh, Access to Trial Exhibits, Maricopa County Access to Superior Court Exhibits)
The media may also seek access to daily court transcripts. Court reporters should be included in your planning discussions so they can be aware of possible requests.
Jury interviews
Talk with the trial judge about the possibility of offering the media an interview with interested jurors immediately following a verdict. Ensure that jurors understand that this is voluntary.