Reporting on court hearings requires an understanding of local laws and knowing what can be reported and what can‘t.
This workshop is presented in two formats, both using the same source material from Media Helping Media. The content is drawn from the MHM article, Court reporting tips for beginners, which covers essential advice and professional standards for journalists covering courts. The principles discussed here are fundamental to sound journalistic practice and upholding high editorial ethics.
The first is a two-hour workshop designed for those who are already familiar with the topic but who would like to deepen their understanding. The second is a four-hour, half-day workshop for those who are new to the topic.
Trainers are invited to select the format that best meets the needs of those they are training. Trainers should also adapt the material so that it complies with local law.
Workshop outline 1: Two-hour session
09:00–10:00 – Session 1: Navigating legal constraints and ethical duties
- Aims:
- To reinforce understanding of local laws and reporting constraints.
- o analyse the critical importance of accuracy in all aspects of court coverage.
- o ensure reporting maintains strict impartiality by covering all sides.
- rainer delivers a short review of local reporting laws, emphasising restrictions on naming certain individuals (e.g., children or victims of sexual assault).
- Focus on legal terms such as ‘contempt of court’ (acting disrespectfully or hindering the legal process) and the consequences of legal breaches.
- Case study analysis:
- rainees work in small groups to review two pre-prepared scenarios involving potential reporting restrictions or ‘contempt of court’ risks.
- hey must identify the danger and propose a legally compliant solution.
- Accuracy check:
- rainees are given a short, factually dense court excerpt and must identify all data points (names, charges, dates) requiring double-checking.
- Group discussion on the tension between ‘open justice’ and legal constraints.
- rainer leads a discussion on how to reflect the presumption of ‘innocence until proven guilty’ in published copy, ensuring fair representation of all parties.
10:00–11:00 – Session 2: Professional practice and effective storytelling
- Aims:
- To master professional conduct and note-taking efficiency in court.
- To practise writing effective leads and sourcing post-court interviews.
- To apply fairness in all dealings with sources and court staff.
- Guidance:
- Trainer provides guidance on in-court etiquette (e.g., punctuality, silence, dress code) and tips for developing a strong working relationship with court ushers.
- Review of reporting technique: selecting the most newsworthy information (usually the verdict/sentence) for the lead, and using a few powerful, accurate ‘verbatim quotes’ (word-for-word statements) alongside summary notes.
- Mock court scene:
- The trainer reads a summary of a court proceeding.
- Trainees practise taking efficient notes, distinguishing clearly between the defence’s argument and the prosecution’s argument.
- Drafting exercise:
- Trainees use their notes to draft the first two paragraphs of a news report.
- They are told to ensure the lead captures the most important fact.
- Group discussion:
- Managing journalistic bias (personal opinions and beliefs) and how to write without subjective comments, letting the facts speak for themselves.
- Reviewing the importance of post-court interviews with witnesses or lawyers to add depth to the story.
Assignment – field reporting simulation
- Preparation:
- Select a recent or fictional local court case.
- Prepare a detailed ‘pre-reporting’ file including the names, charges, court details, and a legal research summary outlining any potential reporting restrictions.
- Coverage Plan:
- Draft a plan for attending the court, including three strategies for effective, shorthand note-taking, and five key questions you would ask the usher or court official.
- Drafting:
- Write a 400-word news report based on your research/scenario, ensuring you adhere to the presumption of innocence, use both summary and ‘verbatim quotes’, and correctly attribute all statements.
- Include a brief post-script explaining how your report upheld accuracy and fairness.
Materials needed for the workshop:
- Handouts summarising interview types and essentials.
- Example interview transcripts.
- Research resources (internet or printouts).
- Recording devices (optional, for mock interviews).
Assessment:
- Participation in discussions and activities.
- Quality of drafted questions and peer feedback.
- Performance in mock interviews and reflection.
Workshop outline 2: Four-hour session
09:00–10:00 – Session 1: Essential preparation and the legal landscape
- Aims:
- To understand the basic structure of the court system and the roles within it.
- To establish the absolute necessity of knowing local laws and rules.
- Overview:
- Trainer provides an overview of court types (e.g., Magistrates, Crown) and the function of key personnel (Judge, Usher, Prosecution, Defence).
- Detailed explanation of the importance of checking court lists and obtaining the charge sheet before a hearing starts.
- Emphasis on the judge’s authority and the potential penalties for disruptive behaviour, including ‘contempt of court’.
- Court mapping:
- Trainees are given a simple diagram of a courtroom and must label where the different parties sit, explaining why the reporter’s location matters.
- Preparation checklist:
- Trainees create a ‘pre-court’ to-do list based on the MHM article: check laws, check court list, travel light, speak to the usher.
- Group discussion:
- The difference between criminal and civil cases and how this impacts what journalists can report.
10:00–11:00 – Session 2: In-court behaviour and note-taking technique
- Aims:
- To ensure professional conduct is maintained inside the courtroom.
- To develop an effective note-taking strategy to capture key information accurately.
- Overview:
- rainer outlines practical rules for in-court behaviour: dressing appropriately, silencing mobile phones, and when/how to use a laptop or take notes quietly.
- Note-taking:
- rainer explains the importance of note-taking: distinguishing between summarising evidence (paraphrasing the meaning) and taking ‘verbatim quotes’ (the exact words spoken) for maximum integrity.
- Active listening drill:
- he trainer plays a short, fast-paced segment of audio (or reads a segment) with deliberately complex language.
- rainees must practise summarising the core meaning in plain language, avoiding jargon.
- Jargon buster:
- rainees identify and define five complex legal terms (e.g., defendant, acquittal, adjournment) and write a simple, plain-English explanation for their audience.
- Acclimatisation:
- Reviewing the challenge of the courtroom environment and how to overcome feelings of being overwhelmed by the pace or language.
11:00-11:15 – Break
11:15–12:45 – Session 3: Ethical reporting, bias and sensitive content
- Aims:
- Instructions:
- rainer to give detailed instruction on the presumption of innocence and how to use careful language to avoid presenting the accused as guilty before the verdict.
- Ethics:
- rainer discusses ethical boundaries, including the need to protect the privacy of vulnerable individuals and the careful use of names and addresses (only part of an address is often needed).
- Discussion:
- rainer leads a discussion on avoiding unconscious bias and subjective comments, and reporting both the prosecution and defence arguments evenly to achieve balance.
- Rewriting for neutrality:
- rainees are given a piece of copy containing subjective adjectives or biased phrasing (e.g., “The clearly guilty man stood up”). They must rewrite the copy to be neutral and factual.
- Ethics role play:
- rainees are given a scenario about a sensitive case involving juveniles or sexual assault victims, and they must determine what information they are legally and ethically allowed to publish without causing offence or violating restrictions.
- Harm:
- rainer leads a discussion on the harm caused by false or misleading information and why accuracy is the foundation of media credibility.
12:45–13:00 – Session 4: Writing the lead and final steps
- Aims:
- To correctly identify the most newsworthy information for the story lead.
- To establish a clear plan for post-court coverage.
- Recap:
- When reporting on trials, the verdict and sentence are usually the most newsworthy facts. This should be the lead.
- Briefing on attribution:
- rainer explains why court reporters must always attribute what is said in court to the person who said it (e.g., “the defence lawyer stated…”).
- Lead drafting:
- rainees receive a final verdict scenario and must draft a clear, concise lead paragraph (15 words or less) using active voice.
- Next steps:
- rainees plan a list of three people they would interview immediately after the trial concludes and two essential facts they must double-check before filing.
- Questions and answers:
- Final quick-fire Q&A on key takeaways for immediate use in the field.
Assignment: Field reporting simulation
- Preparation:
- Select a recent or fictional local court case.
- Prepare a detailed ‘pre-reporting’ file including the names, charges, court details, and a legal research summary outlining any potential reporting restrictions.
- Coverage Plan:
- Draft a plan for attending the court, including three strategies for effective, shorthand note-taking, and five key questions you would ask the usher or court official.
- Drafting:
- Write a 400-word news report based on your research/scenario, ensuring you adhere to the presumption of innocence, use both summary and ‘verbatim quotes’, and correctly attribute all statements.
- Include a brief post-script explaining how your report upheld accuracy and fairness.
Materials needed for the workshop:
- Handouts summarising interview types and essentials.
- Example interview transcripts.
- Research resources (internet or printouts).
- Recording devices (optional, for mock interviews).
Assessment:
- Participation in discussions and activities.
- Quality of drafted questions and peer feedback.
- Performance in mock interviews and reflection.
