As cities and nations become more connected due to the use of social media, we find ourselves examining the lives of people different from ourselves. So much access leaves us yearning to open media doors that should be left closed.
Televised court cases are invasive on the private lives of those involved. Cases that go viral or involve people of high public interest should be limited as far as the courtroom is concerned and never be televised.
Televised court cases are invasive on the private lives of those involved.”
— Staff Writer Chloe Fitzsimmons
In 1995, the O.J. Simpson murder case captured the world. People became invested in the trial, watching it play out from the beginning all the way to the verdict. Despite the court date landing on a Tuesday at 10 a.m., a whopping 57 percent of the United States watched the trial. The still controversial case continues to impact America, and O.J. Simpson will forever be known for his acquittal.
Simpson’s case is a perfect example of how a court case can completely fascinate the world. Although it caught the attention of the nation, the trial was never forced to sustain the repercussions of social media like present-day trials.
Nothing quite captivated the modern age like the case in which actor Johnny Depp sued his ex-wife, actress Amber Heard, for writing an opinion piece for the Washington Post he claimed was detrimental to the future of his career. The six-week long trial divided the world and captured the attention of social media.
As the trial played out, it became apparent that the large majority of people felt Depp was innocent. It was six weeks filled with constant testimony, meaning almost two months of everyday content. As we have seen since the start of monetization, social media influencers used the mass’s opinion to their advantage in order to grow their own platforms.
With the help of influencers, the personal lives of both movie stars were brought to the attention of the entire world.”
— Staff Writer Chloe Fitzsimmons
With the help of influencers, the personal lives of both movie stars were brought to the attention of the entire world.
During the proceeding, both Depp and Heard’s substance abuse was a discussed issue. Photos and videos were taken of both of them in vulnerable situations and put online for the masses to view at their leisure. During her testimony, Heard graphically described Depp sexually assaulting her with a liquor bottle. As much as profiters may not want to admit it, these are details that should not be public information.
The case occurred in a much different time than 1995, and intricate personal details involving their private lives became headline news. With both Depp and Heard being adults, they were able to defend themselves over claims made in the trial, but that is not the case in every situation.
Ruby Franke is a social media influencer who has been charged with six counts of aggravated child abuse. The case has quickly captured attention because Franke shared her life on social media for eight years.
The case record refrained from using the kids’ names, but with Franke’s life already public in many ways, anonymity of the children regarding the case was virtually impossible.
The trial was live-streamed at first. The world watched as Franke brought forward a claim that one of her children had been watching inappropriate content and violating another for many years. Due to an attempt to protect the minors involved, the judge has recently ordered a court seal on the trial.
The problem is Franke’s children will forever be impacted by the case. They had no say as to what was publicized about their family secrets, and will have to face the consequences of the live stream for the rest of their lives.
Convincing the top-dogs to stop streaming trials is certainly a daunting task, especially since cable companies and social media influencers are benefiting from the exploitation. The best way to overcome them is to make the majority opinion so set on not televising the trials that the media has to side with the public view.
We have watched the evolution of these cases and their progressive decline relating to the well-being of those involved.”
— Staff Writer Chloe Fitzsimmons
We have watched the evolution of these cases and their progressive decline relating to the well-being of those involved. Since 1995, the world has changed, and social media has led the way. Influencers gain followers off the backs of the trials, and this will only continue.
Sure, trials are oftentimes held in public courtrooms, but memories cannot be saved and made into memes, and moments can most certainly not be played over and over again in full detail. Putting these videos online exposes personal issues that should not be public.
In a world where social media is so important, we must take a step back and realize what it is creating. Deep personal, psychological, and relationship issues should never be revealed to the world without informed consent.
Because of social media, court cases need to be addressed more carefully than ever to save people’s personal lives. Continuing to invade people’s privacy will have disastrous consequences on the future of social media and the individual lives of those involved.
Opinions expressed in editorials are those of the writer(s). These views may not represent the adviser, The Prowler, advertisers/sponsors, the Starr’s Mill High School administration or staff , or Fayette County Public Schools as a whole. Please see our FAQs for more information pertaining to the rights of The Prowler’s staff members.