Document Type

Thesis - University Access Only

Award Date

2011

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department / School

Journalism and Mass Communications

Abstract

For over four decades, cameras were barred from courtrooms because of the outrageous manner the media conducted itself in the Bruno Hauptmann's 1935 trial. However, the Supreme Court in Chandler v Florida (1987) ruled that cameras in court was not a violation of a defendant's 14th amendment right. This ruling reversed an earlier ruling in Estes v Texas (1965) where the Supreme Court ruled that camera coverage violated the defendant's right to a fair trial. States saw the later ruling as an invitation to open their courtrooms to cameras. So that by 1986, 43 states already allowed cameras into their courtrooms. A 1993 study recorded an increase in states that accepted coverage to 47, but Indiana, Mississippi, and South Dakota were yet to accept cameras into their courtrooms. Now, all 50 states allow some form of coverage in their courtrooms, with South Dakota as the last state to do so. This thesis tested the attitude of judges, state's attorneys and attorneys to reflect a change or lack of change in attitude since the 1993 study, now that South Dakota has accepted cameras into its courtrooms. Findings show that the attitude of the population surveyed shifted from negative to neutral in an 18 years period.

Library of Congress Subject Headings

Television broadcasting of court proceedings -- South Dakota

Conduct of court proceedings -- South Dakota

Courts -- South Dakota -- Officials and employees -- Attitudes

Format

application/pdf

Number of Pages

106

Publisher

South Dakota State University

Download

Share

COinS