Cameras in the Courtroom: "People pay attention to why they are there, not us."

Author 

Chuck Berman

Title of article

Cameras in the Courtroom: "People pay attention to why they are there, not us."

Publication

Chicago Tribune

Date of article

February 10, 2012

Short summary (2-5 sentences, NO COPYING)

            This article shows the recent decision of allowing two cameras and two video cameras in 23 circuit courts in the state of Illinois to photograph the cases. For more than 30 years, this decision has been applied successfully in Wisconsin state. The reporter attended the court there, and he found that the presence of camera in the court didn’t have any effect on people and attorneys. The photographers are looking forward to success of such a decision in Carbondale’s state because it’s more exciting to cover a trial. By applying such decision, the photographers will not need to swarm around the families or defendants to get photos and this will reduce stress on the families.

Issues that you can find

1-      What is your opinion about this decision?

2-      Do you prefer the trials to be announced?

3-      Are the courts in your country provided with cameras?

4-      Do you agree with the reporter that the presence of camera in the court doesn’t affect the court?

5-       Do you think it will be useful to make the people know how the government works?

6-    Do you think in the announced court the trial will turn into a circus?

7-     What is your opinion about some restrictions on allowing cameras in some cases?

Your opinion (2-5 sentences)

            I think that this decision has a lot of advantages such as organizing the court, making the public people connect with the government is working, and helping the photographers to cover the trial with uniform without needs to stay out and swarm the people when they leave the courtroom. I prefer to put some restrictions on allowing cameras in cases that are related with family relations or children.