CLEAN: Strauss-Kahn case reveals differences in media coverage

The transcript discusses the differences in media reporting between the US and Europe, highlighting the openness of American media due to the First Amendment. It contrasts this with the legal constraints in Britain, where contempt of court laws restrict reporting on legal cases. The impact of media reporting on individuals' careers is debated, with some arguing that the US system benefits from freedom of speech. The transcript concludes by comparing media practices in the US and Britain, noting that despite strict rules, British media sometimes fails to adhere to them.

What is a major challenge for British and European media when reporting on legal cases?

• Lack of access to information

• Limited audience interest

• Strict legal constraints

• High reporting costs

How does the First Amendment in the U.S. affect media reporting on legal cases?

• It limits the number of media outlets that can report

• It requires media to get approval before reporting

• It allows for more detailed reporting

• It restricts media from reporting details

What is a potential benefit for an accused individual due to detailed media reporting in the U.S.?

• Reduced legal costs

• Faster legal proceedings

• Public support due to detailed information

• Increased privacy

In what way is media reporting on court cases in Britain often flawed?

• Media often fails to observe strict legal rules

• Media reports are too detailed

• Media lacks access to courtrooms

• Media is overly supportive of the accused

What is a common issue with the tabloid press in Britain regarding legal reporting?

• They often exaggerate details

• They fail to adhere to legal constraints

• They are too supportive of the government

• They lack investigative resources