Twitter proves its worth in reporting from the courtroom

by Brenna Braaten

Twitter, an online real-time messaging service, is fast becoming one of the social media giants by which many people can update their friends on exactly what they’re up to at any given moment. It’s a way to share information, and that’s what newspapers have decided to tap into.

Photo Illustration by Daniel Doherty

Both major and minor news sources have been using Twitter to connect to their audiences and help them learn something about a variety of topics. Tweeting from the courtroom has become an increasingly popular way for reporters to let people know what’s going on in a trial, in bursts of 140 characters, including spaces, or less.

Ron Sylvester is a pioneer when it comes to using social media for journalistic value. For almost two years he’s been tweeting court cases through Twitter, and since then many other papers have followed suit.

Sylvester, of The Wichita Eagle in Wichita Kansas, debuted on Twitter in May 2008. Before that, the Eagle attempted live blogging by e-mail, but people said the updates weren’t coming fast enough.

Sylvester said he didn’t know anyone using Twitter for court cases when he started, although a lot of journalists were being encouraged to use new social media like Twitter and Facebook.

“A lot of people thought that some form of social networking was going to be the way that people distributed information in the future,” he said. “And to some extent it’s worked out that way.”

The first case in which it was used was a murder trial. Sylvester was sent to cover the jury selection. The response to his “tweets” was immediate.

“I started doing it during jury selection, thinking, ‘Nobody’s going to pay attention to this,’” he said. But that was unfounded.

From that first day, the numbers have grown to at least 1,900 followers on Twitter. Sylvester said that’s only a fraction of the true number because many people who don’t use Twitter read his Twitter feed directly on The Wichita Eagle’s website. Even so, the numbers are impressive.

“It’s not a huge number of people, but 1,900 readers is a lot for one of our stories on the Web per day,” he said.

Sylvester said he approaches tweeting a case much as he would a normal story, except his tools are a little different. He said he uses his Blackberry phone and a Bluetooth keyboard to type and send in his tweets as a text message.

“I write the way I write,” he said, “whether I’m sitting down to write a story or sitting down in court.”

Sylvester said he uses complete sentences and quotes, the same way he would if he were writing a news story. He said he tries to keep away from the repetitiveness of a trial, and let his watchers know if there is nothing going on or there is a break.

Usually the 140 character limit of a tweet isn’t a problem, but Sylvester admitted that on occasion he’s forgotten about the limit and had to edit himself.

“The thing I love about Twitter is it forces you to write tight,” he said. “You can’t get carried away.”

Last April, Sylvester said he got permission to tweet in federal court, which generally doesn’t allow cell phones. In that first federal trial, the judge allowed only phones, not laptops, into the courtroom.

“I can file stuff in the courtroom where other people really can’t because they can’t bring their laptops in,” he said. “Plus, everything fits in my pocket.”

Sylvester hasn’t been the only one to use Twitter in federal court.

Students at the University of Montana tweeted during the W.R. Grace trial held in Missoula, Montana.

The School of Journalism and the School of Law collaborated to cover the case, which dealt with the health effects of tremolite asbestos, a deadly hazard from the vermiculite mining, in Libby, Montana.

The court convened four days a week. Students tweeted during two-hour shifts, then posted a summary on a blog afterward.

Although it was her first time using Twitter, Laura Lundquist, a second year graduate student in print journalism who took White’s class, saw an immediate impact.

“As our blog and Twitter feeds became known to the people up in Libby, they tended to follow it pretty closely,” she said.

While Lundquist said the immediacy of the updates was positive for followers, she recognized that there could be downsides.

“The pressure to post rapidly now that we can is hard for news organizations to ignore, but we need to be careful about inaccuracies,” she said.

Jamie Satterfield is another journalist who has had success using Twitter in the courtroom. As a reporter for the Knoxville, Tennessee, News Sentinel, Satterfield has been tweeting for a year and a half.

“We were experimenting with ‘twittering’ for non-breaking news, like our entertainment division,” she said. “So we were just kind of dabbling with it at the newspaper.”

The dabbling worked. Within the first two days, she said she saw more than 1,600 followers, and since then, that number has grown.

Sylvester said he hasn’t run into any problems with tweeting court cases in comparison to writing traditional stories.

“Once the first judge lets you do it and everybody sees that nothing bad’s going to happen, then it’s a lot easier to convince others,” he said. “The federal judge that did it said that it’s no different than if you were taking notes and going back and writing the story. You’re still writing the story, it’s just being delivered in a different way.”

Sylvester’s experience with court has probably helped him in starting with Twitter.

“I’ve been on this beat for 10 years,” he said, “and so I know the lawyers involved, I know all the judges. They trust the job I do and they know I do a good job. I don’t think if I was just starting the beat, if I was just coming on, I don’t think I could do it.”

The basics, even when using Twitter, are still important, Sylvester said.

“Source development, accuracy and professionalism are still the hallmarks of journalism, no matter how you deliver it,” he said.

Satterfield said she hasn’t run into too many problems either, but there are occasional hassles.

“Sometimes spectators who don’t know what I’m doing think I’m text messaging or something if they don’t know who I am, and I generally have to explain what I’m doing,” she said. “But I haven’t had any major problems.”

But not every journalist has been so lucky.

In Maryland, The Baltimore Sun has had serious problems tweeting in courtrooms. While reporters had not been allowed to use devices in the courtroom directly, they had been able to update from outside.

Now a bill banning all electronic devices that would be used for social media has been introduced. Its provisions include Twitter, Facebook or any other site, including future sites that haven’t even been created yet.

Sun Editor Monte Cook said the paper has an audience that wants to know what’s going on, but isn’t necessarily willing to wait for it, and social media are the way to provide immediacy.

Cook said the order was predicated on the assumption that posting on Twitter was essentially like having cameras in the courtroom.

“I don’t think that social media is in any way broadcast,” Cook said. “I think it is conversation; it is passing along information.”

Cook said he thinks the issue is more about openness, and that while defendants must be given a fair trail, jurors should not be influenced and news security must be paramount, courtrooms should remain free and open to the public.

“We believe that the openness, which court proceedings should have for societal concerns, really outweighs the sort of work,” Cook said.

Cook said he understands that clacking on a computer in court may be disruptive, but this specific order extends to the hallways. He said it would prohibit reporters from going into the hallway to put in an update, even though radio reporters have been doing it for much longer, just not on Twitter.

“We think it’s hard to justify that extension of the order,” Cook said.

He said the ban extending to any form or future form of social media is short-sighted and lacks cultural context of what’s going on in society now.

He said he worries it will leave the court system closeted and unavailable to the public.

Right now, the Sun is complying with the order and will use social media as reporters can, but it is working with other media, both in Baltimore and regionally, to get the bill rescinded, or at least be allowed to work more openly.

“I think the court would do well to better understand social media and its application for keeping a well-informed citizenry,” Cook said.

In Georgia last November, U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land interpreted that since the dissemination of messages was instantly posted and available to the public, it was a type of broadcasting.

However, unlike in Baltimore, Land established a media room near the entrance of the courthouse where reporters could file information outside the courtroom itself.

Sedgwick County District Judge Ben Burgess, who first allowed Sylvester to “tweet” in the courtroom, said that since video cameras are allowed in the courtroom in Wichita, he doesn’t see why the newspapers can’t have their own form of live feed.

“The bottom line was, as long as it was not disruptive and doesn’t attract any attention to what’s going on inside the courtroom, then I do not see that there’s any particular problem with permitting it,” he said.

While Burgess has never had a problem with tweeting or denied a person from being allowed, he said there are still rules they have to adhere to.

“I have not had an occasion to actually implement an order to exclude (reporters),” he said, “but if they violate the understanding that we have, they would be excluded.”

For instance, if a reporter named a juror publicly, Burgess said it would warrant immediate dismissal from the courtroom.

Whether problematic or not, using Twitter has some benefits.

Twitter is reaching a new audience, as Sylvester found out at a tweetup, a real-life meeting of a group of people who use Twitter.

He said the Web programmer asked a follower of Sylvester’s Twitter feed in his 20s if he read the paper or the Eagle’s website. To both the man replied no.

“Later she said that’s proof that you’re reaching a new audience; people who would not come to our news website, that wouldn’t read the paper are reading you on Twitter. So that actually showed we’re reaching a new audience.”

Satterfield said a benefit of Twitter is that people get more information than in a normal news story.

“Even though it’s coming piecemeal, I think they get a much better sense of what it’s actually like in the courtroom,” she said.

Whether it’s Twitter or another new way to disseminate information, journalists are having to rethink the way they work.

“I think the days of having print and broadcast are gone,” he said. “I think it’s everything. I think you’re going to have to write, you’re going to have to be able to shoot and edit video and audio, and take photos. You’re going to have to have a broad base of skills.”

The days of working with just a pen and a notebook are also gone, Sylvester said with a laugh.

“I’ve got this rolling briefcase I carry,” he said. “It’s got a video camera, a tripod and all these microphones. And now usually the one thing I forget is a notepad and pen.”