Law in the age of media logic

Ostensibly, the many institutional and ideological barriers that protect the law from the scrutiny and intervention of the media, and the many differences between legal and media logic, should provide some immunity to the mediatization of the legal sphere. Nevertheless, it appears that like other social institutions, the law too has undergone a process of mediatization. This paper examines the impact of increased media presence and media logic on legal decision-making and on the legal process itself as experienced and articulated by Israeli legal and media professionals. Combining StrÖmbäck’s (2008) criteria for the basic prerequisites of mediatization, and Schulz’s (2004) detailed description of the four elements that identify the adoption of media logic, we demonstrate how the mediatization of the legal realm has changed the nature of legal procedures, legal decision-making, and the coverage of legal affairs. We found that in the Israeli common law system, both legal and media actors have actively adopted media logic in all aspects of the legal process, but at the same time seek to restrain the mediatization of the legal sphere. The commitment of both legal and media actors to preserving the legitimacy of the legal sphere appears to inhibit the wholesale embrace of media logic.