Abstract
Israel’s courtroom journalists have been condemned in the public discourse quite often over the past decade. Public figures facing criminal charges have accused these reporters of adhering to the prosecution’s narrative and breaching the presumption of innocence of the accused. Social media influencers without legal expertise routinely question the dignity and professionalism of these journalists, disseminating biased and false information over various social platforms.In this article I seek to analyze how courtroom journalists view their experiences and, when applicable, the difficulties involved in preserving their professional authority in the digital era while adhering to journalistic ethics.This study draws on longitudinal qualitative research comparing the findings of semi-structured interviews conducted in 2020 with 12 leading legal journalists to 40 previous interviews on this same subject conducted in 2007 and 2012. The research finds that despite a decline in the journalists’ confidence in the legal establishment, they nonetheless feel obliged to protect the rule of law in Israel from the public rage fueled by populist politicians. However, the proximity between the court reporters and the judicial system appears to weaken the social esteem for these two systems.
Translated title of the contribution | Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Israel's Courtroom Journalists in the Digital Age |
---|---|
Original language | Hebrew |
Pages (from-to) | 68-99 |
Number of pages | 32 |
Journal | מסגרות מדיה |
Volume | 21 |
State | Published - 2022 |
IHP Publications
- ihp
- Mass media and criminal justice
- Courts
- Trust
- Journalistic ethics
- Electronic newspapers
- Mass media
- Authority
- Attitude (Psychology)
- Hebrew language -- Style
- Journalists
- Discourse analysis
- Change (Psychology)
- Occupational prestige
- Online social networks