From Library Journal
The author, an experienced Washington courtroom attorney, here attempts to reconcile the sometimes conflicting relationship between the First Amendment's protection of the news media's right to report court proceedings and the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a speedy trial by an impartial jury. The author notes that television's scope and intensity can have such a profound impact in the jury selection process as to diminish the impartiality of potential jurors. Goldfarb calls this part of television's contaminating potential, which, he notes, is underscored by such disparities as evidentiary proceedings, in which the jury is prevented from watching or hearing parts of the proceedings that are widely seen by the public. However, it was television's wide-angle lens that placed into its proper perspective the conflict between the Simpson jury verdict and the public's widespread perception of his guilt. Goldfarb concludes that while television has the potential to pervert justice, the extent to which it enhances justice is greater. A better treatment of this issue could hardly be found; legal scholars and court administrators should add it to their must-read list.?Philip Y. Blue, New York State Supreme Court Criminal Branch Law Lib.
Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Review
"Goldfarb argues persuasively for cameras in the courtroom, O.J. notwithstanding. He is aware of the problems but believes strongly that the more open a courtroom, the more open and free our society. The challenge, which he describes so well, is to balance the new demanding technology against our traditional dedication to democracy."
-Marvin Kalb,Director, Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy, Harvard University
"A tour de force, a one-stop repositiory of the history, facts, and the law of the matter. I plan to plagiarize from it shamelessly. This is an important subject, and Goldfarb's book provides the first comprehensive, in-depth study of the issue."
-Fred Graham,Chief Anchor and Managing Editor, Court TV
"Going beyond the ovious controversies of recent years, Goldfarb surveys the role of television in courtrooms with cool but crisp detachement. He brings historical context, legal analysis, and rich experience to bear on the issue, concluding that courts are public institutions that do not belong exclusively to the judges and lawyers who run them. His persuasive argument for greater openness is bound to influence future debate on the topic."
-Sanford J. Ungar,Dean, School of Communication, American University
