As I watch the daily coverage of the Candace Derksen trial, I wonder just how difficult it must be to cover this story as a journalist.
While I was interning at CBC last month, the trial was just beginning, and I went with one of the reporters to watch the first day of the trial. The reporter was doing live hits about the trial, and I noticed just how careful she was about what she did or did not report. What evidence she presented, what information she gave, and what facts she told were all carefully planned out and checked over with lawyers so as to not provoke a re-trial.
Today in J class, we reviewed some of the things we learned last year about media law and some of the above topics came up.
For journalists, there are so many rules and standards they should know before they report on trials in particular, especially in a case so high profile as the one about Candace ( I've personally read her mother's book about her murder and recommend it, it's riveting.)
All the rules must be daunting for journalists, but I'm assuming that experience over time helps them learn what is appropriate to report on and what needs to be left out. Also, I'm sure it helps that places like the CBC have lawyers to help them sort through all the regulations!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
But in most cases there's just one general rule: If the jury hears it, you can report it.
ReplyDeleteIt's the stuff they don't hear that you gotta watch out for.
Mistrials due to errors in media reporting are rare.