Have Drone Will Travel: Slow-Moving Regulators Force Innovation Overseas

John Oliver Has The Solution To The Supreme Court's Refusal To Videotape Supreme Court Hearings: Dogs

from the not-cats? dept

Tue, Oct 21st 2014 3:48pm — Mike Masnick

For many years, we've discussed the pure ridiculousness of the Supreme court's adamant refusal to allow cameras in the courtroom, along with the Justices' questionable justifications of the ban. Now it appears that John Oliver has taken up the issue as well, but unlike those just whining about it, Oliver (thanks to the resources of HBO) has a possible "solution." Dogs. Oliver starts out mocking Justice Antonin Scalia's reason for barring cameras: that people would just see 15- or 30-second clips from the arguments, taking things out of context. Of course, as Oliver points out, that makes absolutely no sense, since the Supreme Court already releases audio of the hearings, and thus we already do hear the same clips -- it's just that they're generally paired with artistic renderings of the Justices instead of the actual video.

His solution -- using "an almost immoral amount of resources" -- is to present video representations of the entire Supreme Court... using dogs (and a couple of birds in supporting roles). And, Oliver claims, they're making those videos freely available to any other news provider who would like to create complete reenactments of any court case in a way that is cute and guaranteed to draw more attention than the court renderings, or, hell, actual videos if they were ever allowed. You can see the full ten minutes of footage (and, yes, I watched it all) right here: That video also, helpfully, links to the Supreme Court's oral arguments audio page for people to download. And the video description notes:

Please feel free to use it, post your videos, and tag them #RealAnimalsFakePaws so we can find them.

The only disappointment is that whoever put it up, still officially left it under a "standard" license, rather than the Creative Commons license that YouTube makes available. Still, nice move by Oliver and his team.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: cameras, cameras in court, dogs, john oliver, supreme court, video, video of supreme court

14 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

randomjoe (profile), 21 Oct 2014 @ 4:09pm

Should have just used Muppets
Muppets don't need to fed or walked.

And I'd like to hear Statler and Waldorf heckle the justices.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Oct 2014 @ 4:25pm

Why isn't EVERYTHING recorded? Anything I do in court is. Double standard anyone?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Oct 2014 @ 4:26pm

Re:
Because for hundreds of years, it wasn't. Traditionalism and all that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alien Rebel (profile), 21 Oct 2014 @ 4:27pm

Re: Should have just used Muppets
I'd prefer to have a dog represent Scalia; I doubt any Muppet could drool as comically or reproduce Scalia's patented expression of self-satisfied approval after having just sniffed his own balls.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Oct 2014 @ 4:44pm

overbearing laughtrack
I wish John Oliver would use a different laughtrack, or at least a different laughtrack operator, as the current guy the show uses has a very heavy hand. Maybe it's supposed to be reminiscent of the 1970s era British TV comedies, with their overbearing laughtracks, but it would be most appreciated if there was some way to turn the volume down, or off.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
CharlieBrown, 21 Oct 2014 @ 6:01pm

As soon as I saw this I thought "Techdirt will post something about this!" and I was right! Sometimes it is good to be right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Robert, 21 Oct 2014 @ 7:23pm

Re: overbearing laughtrack
Just like the Chicken, Picky.

Use the link above to YouTube. No sound.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 21 Oct 2014 @ 9:16pm

Genius
Just pure genius.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 22 Oct 2014 @ 2:14am

Re: Genius
Paw five!

Ahem.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 22 Oct 2014 @ 6:36am

Re: Re: Should have just used Muppets
An unused muppet would capture Thomas' utter detachment from the proceedings, though.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2014 @ 7:33am

...you know what would be nice?

Being able to watch the show without using VPNs and proxies until 72 hours later.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2014 @ 8:22am

Re:
it is recorded. Audio only.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2014 @ 8:22am

Re: overbearing laughtrack
nice try. but we can see what you're doing here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 3:10am

Re: Re: Re: Should have just used Muppets
No way! Imagine the copyright fiasco that would ensue were Muppets used! It'd be a copyright tsunami!
[ link to this | view in thread ]