Holdings Information

Bibliographic Record Display

• Title:Courting publicity : Twitter and television cameras in court / Paul Lambert.
  
•    
• Author/Creator:Lambert, Paul, 1971-
  
• Published/Created:Haywards Heath, West Sussex : Bloomsbury Professional, ©2011.
  

• Holdings

  Holdings Record Display

  • Location:LAW LIBRARY (level 3)Where is this?
    
  • Call Number: K2110 .L36 2011
    
  • Number of Items:1
    
  • Status:Available
    

   
• Library of Congress Subjects:Television broadcasting of court proceedings.
  Social media--Law and legislation.
  Conduct of court proceedings--Technological innovations.
  
• Subject(s):Twitter.
  
• Description:xxiv, 412 p. ; 25 cm.
  
• Notes:Includes bibliographical references and index.
  
• ISBN:9781847669001
  184766900X
  
• Contents:Machine generated contents note: pt. A Twitter and Social Networking
  ch. 1 Introduction: Courting Publicity
  courts and publicity
  ch. 2 Internet and Legal Conflicts
  Introduction
  Human Rights
  Television in the Supreme Court
  Evidence
  Twitter
  rise of the Internet and social networking
  What is Twitter and social networking?
  Social networking concerns
  huge social and legal shift
  ch. 3 Twitter, Courts and Cases
  Introduction
  Twitter and super-injunctions
  Twitter and juror misconduct
  Twitter, juries and US courts
  UK juries
  New rules addressing juror social media misconduct
  US court rules for tweeting
  United Kingdom
  Fair trial
  ch. 4 Twitter in Court: Reporting Issues and UK Consultation
  Introduction: Twitter in the UK
  Legal background
  Dangers of tweeting in court - reporting
  Dangers of tweeting in court - jurors
  Dangers of Facebook in court - jurors
  Dangers of tweeting in court - judges and lawyers
  Interim guidelines in the UK
  UK Supreme Court-guidance
  UK Twitter Consultation
  Consultation Paper
  Consultation
  Insufficient research
  Purpose/applications
  Forms of LTBC
  `Live'
  Effects issues over time
  Consultation questions
  Is there a legitimate demand for live, text-based communications to be used from the courtroom?
  Under what circumstances should live, text-based communications be permitted from the courtroom?
  Are there any other risks which derive from the use of live, text-based communications from the court?
  How should the courts approach the different risks to proceedings posed by different platforms for live, text-based communications from the court?
  How should permitting the use of live, text-based communications from court be reconciled with the prohibition against the use of mobile telephones in court?
  Should the use of live, text-based communications from court be principally for the use of the media? How should the media be defined? Should persons other than the accredited media be permitted to engage in live, text-based communications from court?
  Conclusion
  ch. 5 Super-injunctions
  Introduction
  Official court review
  Official Judicial Report investigation
  Conclusion
  pt. B Cameras in Court
  ch. 6 Cameras in Court: UK Developments
  Introduction
  legal backdrop
  Trial (1993) - documentaries and applications
  UK: The Caplan Report 1989
  England and Wales pilot
  `Broadcasting Courts' Consultation Paper 2005
  `Broadcasting Courts' - response to 2005 consultation paper
  `The Barristers' (2008)
  Privy Council 2006
  UK Supreme Court 2009
  Discussion
  Conclusion
  ch. 7 Cameras in Court: Developments in the US
  Introduction
  Possible legislation
  Misrepresentations and misunderstandings
  Hollingsworth - the latest case
  Federal courts: the first pilot experiment
  Federal courts: a second pilot experiment
  Planning for the second federal pilot
  Eye tracking
  Location
  Footage material for research
  US Supreme Court
  Conclusion
  ch. 8 What is (Television) Courtroom Broadcasting?
  Scope and forms of courtroom broadcasting
  Exclusions
  Television courtroom broadcasting
  What is television courtroom broadcasting - scope and definition
  Scope - general
  Forms
  Out-of-court effects research
  Comparisons and tools
  Opinions and self-reports
  brief history of courtroom broadcasting and research
  Education
  research and arguments interface
  Forms
  Need for research
  Significance
  What is television courtroom broadcasting
  Validation
  Generalisation
  starting point
  Importance of identifying particular forms
  Forms and the TCB literature
  News
  Entertainment and daytime TV
  US
  UK
  Additional form considerations
  Criminal/civil
  Presentation
  Consent
  Rules
  Gavel-to-gavel (G2G)
  Live/recorded
  Footage angles/shots/zooms
  Closed circuit courtroom broadcasting
  Tribunal forms
  New forms
  Permission - who/what grants access permission?
  Application - do the media have to apply for access in each instance? If so, to whom?
  Control rule - do any procedures, controls or restrictions apply? If so, from where?
  Restrictions/control - who and what can control or restrict the access and filming?
  Length/time - what is permitted/required to be filmed and/or broadcast?
  Relay and filming form - what are the different types of filming courtroom broadcasting?
  Programme-use form - what is the style of programme that the footage is used for?
  Broadcast content use - how is the broadcast content used?
  Broadcaster/producer - who broadcasts it?
  Film capture form - who films the case?
  Camera form - what rules, if any, apply to the type of camera (s) used?
  Locus - where can/must the camera be?
  Equipment - what equipment is or is not allowed?
  Purpose/aim of courtroom broadcasting form
  Broadcast time - how is courtroom broadcasting scheduled?
  Broadcast audience - who watches courtroom broadcasting?
  Court form - what courts can be accessed?
  Case form - what cases can be shown?
  Consent form - what consent(s), if any, are required? How are they obtained? When? From whom?
  Research - does any research occur, or sufficient research?
  Conclusion
  ch. 9 US Supreme Court Research Challenge
  Introduction
  US challenge
  Estes case
  Research challenge
  Estes - effects/actual effect
  Juror effects
  Witness effects
  Judge effects
  Defendant effects
  Out-of-court effects research
  Out-of-court effects - education
  Forms
  Subtle effects
  Chandler case - empirical data/effect shown
  Hollingsworth case
  Reference to camera issues
  Reference to witness effects issues
  Evidence of harm/effects
  Considered rules are required
  Publicity effects
  No empirical data
  Education
  US Supreme Court issues and eye tracking
  Conclusion
  Bibliography
  pt. C Effects Issues
  ch. 10 Education Effects Research
  Introduction
  Twitter as educational
  Cameras in court as educational
  Empirical research regarding educational effects
  Petkanas
  Paddon
  Netteburg
  Ossinger
  Kohm
  Keller
  Entner
  Federal study
  New Zealand
  Pogorzelski and Brewer
  Harris
  Vinson and Ertter
  Roberts
  Empirical literature relevant to educational effects
  Lassiter
  Short Report
  Stewart
  Comments on the empirical education research
  Educational
  Challenges
  Forms
  Opportunity for validation of educational television courtroom broadcasting
  `Information' and `education'
  Testing education
  Education and meaning
  Education and television usage
  What amount of `educational' effect is required?
  Educate about what? Specific versus general education
  Effective education and learning
  Educational accuracy
  Education and broadcasting rules
  Education: the audience to be educated
  Audience choice and selection
  Audience fragmentation
  Expanding legal education?
  Competing environment
  Television courtroom broadcasting content
  Content objectivity
  News use of television courtroom broadcasting
  News accuracy
  Who educates? The TruTV example
  Entertainment
  Summary
  ch. 11 Audience Effects
  Introduction
  Twitter in court
  Cameras in court
  Audience attention
  Audience ratings
  Audience segments
  Audience reception
  Audience understanding
  Text and audience
  Audience attention and salience
  Communications
  Television courtroom broadcasting communications models
  Structure/content
  Programme environment
  Broadcasting styles
  Television courtroom broadcasting content
  Actors/witness memory and recall
  Crimewatch
  Many effects
  Audience research tools
  Different audiences
  media audience
  Audience uses
  Audience sizes
  Recall of television courtroom broadcasting
  Meaning
  Social meaning and uses
  Conclusion
  ch. 12 Empirical Camera Research
  Twitter in court
  Cameras in court
  Themes and issues
  Forms
  Type
  Recorded/quantified
  Aim/hypothesis
  Controls/conditions
  Validation/replication possible
  Number of subjects
  Subject description
  Method
  Effects
  Camera location
  Rules
  Education
  Questionnaires
  Audience effect focus
  Eyewitness research
  Agenda setting
  Advantages and disadvantages
  Discussion
  Inadequate research
  Other potential avenues for research
  Administration
  Comparisons
  Comparative research
  Many questions exist
  Effects research
  Courtroom actor research
  Defendants
  Different restrictions
  Replication
  Validation
  Longitudinal research
  Empirical research design
  Lack of empirical research
  Out-of-court - audience
  Media effects
  Educational
  Little content analysis/footage
  Parliamentary broadcasting
  Other media
  Media process/footage use
  Media process
  Media, etc selection
  Little empirical research on each issue
  Empirical controls
  ch. 13 Psychology
  Introduction
  Twitter
  Cameras in court
  Out-of-court research
  In-court research
  In-court self reports and opinion reports
  Psychology eyewitness research
  Identification evidence/warnings
  Television courtroom broadcasting factors
  Contents note continued: Psychology - mistaken eyewitness identification factors
  Television courtroom broadcasting safeguards
  Psychology research on effects
  Confidence reports
  Consent
  Inconsistent
  Arousal
  Weapon focus and camera focus
  Psychology eyewitness tools
  Distraction effects tools
  Psychology and salience
  Cameras
  Stress
  Context
  Psychology recall research tools
  Blocking
  Conclusion
  ch. 14 Eye Tracking
  Introduction
  Twitter
  Cameras in court - eye tracking and television courtroom broadcasting
  Advantages of eye tracking
  Eye tracking and psychology
  Eye tracking applications
  Eye tracking in-court
  Eye tracking out-of-court
  Eye tracking and distraction
  First in-court demonstration
  Conclusion
  ch. 15 Meeting the Research Challenges
  Introduction
  Twitter
  Cameras in court
  Definitions
  Data collection
  Baseline data
  Hypothesis to research
  Time to begin - the baseline
  Substantiation and the body of research
  Methodology
  Questions to be addressed in future research
  Distraction and eye tracking
  Irish baselines
  Education and the television audience
  Communication models
  media audience
  Agendas
  Language
  Confidence
  Weapons focus
  Other issues
  Research forms
  Definition of courtroom broadcasting
  Forms of television courtroom broadcasting
  Psychology and eye witness research
  Sentencing effects
  Parliamentary broadcasting
  Media and communications
  Bias
  media and research
  Educational research
  More accurate reflection of courts
  Gatekeeping
  Media
  Personality type
  Research designs
  General applicability
  What is being researched?
  Review
  Reliability and validity of research
  Effects and effects sensitivity
  Records
  Administering the survey
  Analysis and results
  Over time
  Establishing the baseline
  Communications
  Courtroom discourse
  Eye tracking
  Conclusio
  ch. 16 Conclusion: The Future
  Introduction
  US Supreme Court research challenge
  Addressing the US Supreme Court research challenge
  Definitions and forms research
  Education
  Baselines and parameters
  United Kingdom
  Eye tracking
  Future research
  Conclusion.