Blogging in the Courtroom

1. Blogging in the Courtroom Leslie Douglas Melissa Fellencer Tom Kane

2. Key People • Ginger Moorhouse– Publisher 1989 & 1994 • Michael Fisch– CEO • Jessica Logan – Court Reporter/Blogger • Mike Jenner– Executive Editor • Davin McHenry – Web Editor • Steve E. Swenson – Union President

3. Background • The Bakersfield Californian was an early adopter of web-based journalism • Paper went online on Oct. 1, 1995 • Decided to create a blog to follow an important court case in 2007 • The case was about the murder of 5 residents, 3 were young children in July 2003 • Vincent Brothers, the accused, was a former teacher and vice principal in Bakersfield. • He was a well-known public figure

4. Idea • Mike Jenner (Executive Editor)thought it would be an interesting idea to blog directly from the courtroom • Jessica Logan (Court Reporter) had already written stories on the pre-trial motions and court proceedings for Brothers • Was the obvious choice to write a blog as well

5. What is included in the blog? • Web Editor McHenry asked Logan to blog twice a day • Little tidbits from court that do not make it into the stories “court notes” • The blog would include crime/trial stories, videos from trial, links to photos, timelines and juror profiles, crime scene map and trial blog

6. Best way to blog? • Began with phone calls • Downfall – Had to leave courtroom • Hand-held device was used to file copy • However, it was difficult to type as it only had a small keyboard • Logan had to listen to court proceedings, take notes, and send news updates • Finally brought in her laptop with wireless capabilities

7. Potter Box Empirical Definition Logan was being bombarded with requests to update the blog more frequently. Choosing Loyalties Readers of the blog Fact errors about people involved in case Jessica Logan Identifying Values Logan’s blog entries were not being edited before being placed online. The problem of libel was apparent. Appeal to Ethical Principles Fair and balanced story from the press.

8. Problems • Logan was being asked to update every 10 minutes during the trial • She complained in an e-mail to Steve Swenson (Union President) who got involved • She was also being asked to mark exact times to correspond with video segments that were of importance • Swenson said, “As someone who has covered trials, that just can’t be done effectively. The reality of covering a trial is you have to listen to all the foundation questions to get the nuances of the critical facts. Constant distractions in a case with a gag order would lessen the reliability and accuracy of our coverage.”

9. Proofreading/Editing Issues • Logan’s entries at first were being looked at and edited by editors before published on blog • However, as the trial went on, Logan was responsible for publishing her own unedited entries • Logan feared that something libelous would slip into her entries and in fact, something did • Her grammar and sentence structure caused readers to complain and she misrepresented an important fact due to basic error.

10. What we would have done • We believe that the Bakersfield Californian should have provided a clear guideline and plan to Logan • Logan’s entries should also have been proofread at least once before publication with the same degree of scrutiny as a regular story.

11. Questions? • “Journalism is important. It’s important to have standards. And it’s important to give the best quality of information to the readers that we possibly can. And the editors trust us with that,” said Logan. • What do you think?