One thing my job has that most don’t is public scrutiny. Any member of the public can come by, sit down, and watch me work. My actions are reviewed by higher authorities where both affirmances and reversals are in the public record for anyone to look up. The more noteworthy cases get reported in the newspapers and on the Internet, as well as on radio and television at times.
It comes with the job. Rather than fear the scrutiny as Napoleon seemed to, I see the merits of robust reporting.
That doesn’t mean it’s easy though. My responsibility is to do my job right regardless of the desires or expectations of those interested in the case. For people who read news reports about my cases, some of my decisions are unpopular while others meet with general approval. As a federal judge told me soon after I took the bench in 1995, “You can’t worry about opinions and criticism. Just do what’s right.”
That’s good advice, yet I’m glad for the scrutiny from the public and the press. It keeps me vigilant over my work, and while popular opinion cannot dictate my decisions it does keep me vigilant to do what’s right.
***
Do we have a free press? Or does it publish at the behest of powerful owners with their own interests at heart rather than the interests of truth?
What is your impression of journalists you’ve met, BBT?
I have a brother in law who is a sub-editor….but he does football news. And I have a colleague who used to be one. Sounds like a world of heavy drinking and partying, but these are the little people….
I interact with people at various levels in the media and they’ve seemed as responsible as you could wish. Except for one guy. He always seemed to have an agenda. He doesn’t work there any more.
But I’m not talking about individual journalists….
I’m talking about the inflammatory headlines that the press publish which seem to bear little relationship to reality or are deliberately misleading.
Insightful post! Shared. Thanks!
Thanks, Aileen!