Page 17 - Courting the Media Contemporary Perspectives on Media and Law

8 Geoffrey Sykes

transcription, or on occasion for evidence, that can be used in a controlled way
when effective or required. However, as a medium it might not contribute to
the main rhetorical strategies of argument and exposition that are fundamental
in case development. Video is a relatively natural and secondary means for
recording, rather than a primary tool of exposition, discovery and argument.
Spiesel‘s study of video as a tool in detection and generally in legal
domains is invaluable in addressing the potential and challenge of mobile
equipment introduced as a tool to formal decision-making. Her paper reveals
the fundamental conceptual and research shifts required to keep pace with
contemporary application of media in legal practice. Her inquiry into
communication and language researches the status of non-verbal imagery, and
interpretation of events, and reality and authenticity as mediated by point of
view (POV) video capture. Her chapter shows a determined and serious
attempt to see video as an expressive field in its own right, even in its most
fixed and direct form, and often quite distinct from cinemagraphic language.
While issues of mass and public media could at least be addressed within
a regulatory and jurisprudential framework, of generalised and public effects
and issues of representation, the shift from mass to new media, and from
broadcast to interpersonal transmission, has made sudden and unexpected
inroads on the use of media tools, for example in the presentation of evidence.
When multiple perspectives of a crime scene are captured both by news media,
as well as bystanders and a collection of phone and portable cameras, in still
and video, the status of any official police evidence becomes relativised. In
many cases the only evidence available is the shaky hand held point of view
shot of an amateur by-stander. A host of issues needs to be addressed with the
employment of high quality consumer and portable media. No longer can non-
broadcast material be identified as poor, grainy or hand held. Spiesel‘s taser
example shows how discernment is required in any form of video composition.
Why else would police seek to censor cameras at crime or accident sites, and
deny bystanders the prevailing right to photograph in public places? At worst
the police are forced to become producers of their own account amidst a range
of possible alternative ‗unofficial‘ videos, and courts are forced to evaluate the
status and reliability of forms of video evidence that they might traditionally
prefer to dismiss.
There is a fundamental error in regarding video as a passive or realistic
medium. The apparently fixed and close up framing of the videoconference
interview restricts gestures and body movement, and can focus on the face in a
way that is not natural or realistic in everyday interactions. Fixed video shots
are framed and controlled as much as they are truthful. With the prevalence of