#Famous on C-Block?… or a Jailhouse-Crock?

In 2008, Jodi Ann Arias put together an elaborate plan to corner her victim Travis Alexander and brutally stab him to death.  After 29 consecutive stab wounds, a slit to his neck nearly decapitating him, and a gunshot wound to the head, she watched him suffer and take his last breath.  She left him in the shower to rot, until he was ultimately found five days later in his Mesa, Arizona home.   Due to the heinous nature of the crime, and the fact that she was an “attractive” female, the case garnered enormous media attention.  After a lengthy trial, she was found guilty of first degree murder.  Currently, Jodi awaits her fate in the penalty phase as the Prosecutor Juan Martinez seeks the death penalty.

 As a convicted murderer, Jodi Arias has developed a large body of loyal followers via her Twitter page, which is run by a “friend”/previous fellow inmate.  She currently sells artwork on her website by using Twitter to advertise.  She also uses Twitter as a platform to: promote sales of her wristbands, taunt the victim’s family, solicit donations, poke fun at Prosecutor Juan Martinez, belittle her own attorney Kirk Nurmi, and flaunt her media coverage.  Should any of this be allowed to happen? 

 The Son of Sam Law, applicable in Arizona, prevents criminals from profiting from their crimes.  Although her artwork is not directly related to her crime, her Twitter account brings her enough fame to enable a healthy volume and a continuous flow of business. Should her horrendous murder be an outlet for her fame?  Is fame a legitimate form of profit? Would any of us ever know Jodi Arias if not for the gruesome death of Travis Alexander?   Should Jodi Arias have a voice to the outside world, after she extinguished Travis’ so horribly forever? Her latest tweet says she’s going “Radio Silent.”  Considering that jury selection begins soon, her sudden choice to “sign off” seems obvious.  Should such use of Social Media by a convicted murderer ever be allowed?

May it Please The Court, I’d Like to Tweet Now

Last week, the Iowa Supreme Court submitted a proposal to revise its current rules for expanded media coverage during courtroom proceedings, specifically addressing the use of smart phones, tablets and the like to live blog and tweet. With most of my courtroom experience to date taking place in NY and PA courts I found this to be quite interesting. Although some judges in NY and PA allow certain uses of mobile devices, most courts I have been in had a pretty strict no-cell-phone-use policy. I have, on more than one occasion, witnessed judges stop everything in order to reprimand an attorney or even a gallery member for not having their phone on silent. There are currently 36 states (see survey link below) that have a policy addressing the use Twitter in the Courtroom, but only a handful of those policies actually allow members of the media to use social media to report live from court.

One can immediately see at least some of the upside of allowing live tweets from court, as nationwide-dissemination of a tweet to the general public will grant them instantaneous access and knowledge of everything happening in the proceeding. However, one should just as easily be able to recognize some shortfalls of allowing the use of social media from live court. For instance, what if an empanelled juror came across certain blogs or tweets that affects their impartiality? Can justice truly be served or will the use of social media during a live trail put certain litigants at a disadvantage? With the exponential growth of social media and more and more people getting their news from social media platforms each year, it seems only inevitable that these are questions courts across the country will be facing in the near future. However, according to the most recent survey conducted by the CCPIO, an organization that partners with the National Center for State Courts, we are still further away than one might think from all courts hopping on the Social Media Train.

The Birth of RoboTweeting

NBC News reports that companies are becoming “Twitter-savvy” when it comes to consumer complaints.  In some instances customers logging complaint are retweeted with patronizing responses.  For example, according to the article, when @OccupyLA tweeted “you can help by stop stealing people’s houses!!” The Bank of America retweeted “We’d be happy to review your account.”  Corporate manipulation of Twitter is yet another example of how “the system” can corral innovative technology for its own use.   Gen-xers, hipsters and naughts have fled Facebook in droves  once businesses hijacked the social media.  Now Twitter.  Can Instagram be far behind???

New York City Restaurants Banning Food Photography

Do you take pictures of your food at restaurants? Plan on taking a picture of your Valentine’s Day dinner? You might be banned from taking that picture this Valentine’s Day. This is because New York City restaurant owners are banning food photography by customers. The restaurant owners don’t want people  posting pictures of their food on social media sites.  Is this fair? Should the practice be banned?  Read the CBS News story here, and comment on this post with your thoughts.

Social Media Firms are Moving into the Middle East

Social Media firms are now increasing their presence in the Middle East. The companies hope to capitalize on the recent popularity of social media in the region.  They are asserting their presence via digital advertising. Digital advertising has traditionally not been used in the Middle East.  According to The New York Times, print advertising, and television advertising, have been the main methods of advertising.   It will interesting to follow whether digital advertising will take off in the Middle East. Click on this link to read The New York Times article about the topic.