The Courts are all a‘Twitter’: The Implications of Social Media Use in the Courts
Emily M. Janoski-Haehlen
Valparaiso University Law School
May 26, 2011
Valparaiso University Law Review, Vol. 46, 2011
Tweet, poke, post, friend, like, blog, link, comment, and share: the opportunities to communicate electronically using social media tools seem never ending. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace, and LinkedIn are just a few of the social media sites that allow people to communicate and “connect” with others across the world in seconds. E-mail and sending text messages are two other ways to communicate electronically, but neither e-mails nor text messages can keep up with the speed, accessibility, and popularity of social media. Social media is entrenched in our lives as evidenced by the fact that adult profiles on online social media sites are up from only 8% in 2005 to 47% in 2010. The legal profession has also jumped aboard the social media bandwagon with 40% of judges reporting they are on social media sites and 56% of attorneys reported having a presence on social media sites. Whichever “social networking” or communication method is chosen by an individual, the technology has made that communication instantaneous. Unfortunately, social media communication is also dangerous to the integrity of the courts.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 28
Keywords: social media, social networking, twitter, Facebook, juror misconduct, jury instruction, judicial ethics, ethics
JEL Classification: K00, K10
Date posted: May 28, 2011
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.172 seconds