Hearings and proceedings in Florida workers' compensation are open to the public. Section 440.29(2). That could have many meanings. I have seen hearings at which members of the public appear and quietly observe. I have seen only one in which the news crews showed up. See Closed Hearings (March 2019). I had two news crews, four lawyers, and witnesses in a very small room for a trial years ago. But for the most part, our process is not of interest to the world around us. I neither celebrate nor lament that truth.
There are tribunals in which the public takes great interest. And there are tribunals in which there would be no television cameras allowed despite their facilities being far larger and possessing far greater technological accouterment. There are courts in this country that do not allow cameras, video, or otherwise. Their judges find such devices pose extreme threat of disruption. For that matter, they bar the presence of a cell phone (not only in the hearing room itself but beyond the lobby of the building.
That was reminded recently when a news company broke the story of how it covered a story in lovely downtown Miami. It was portrayed as a story of great innovation, imagination, and adversity. But, for the old folks in the crowd it may seem less so. The story involved Cable News Network, and a few may remember before cable and yet some streamers of today won't remember cable.
CNN reported on its ingenuity. It had a proceeding it wished to cover and it was frustrated that it was not permitted to leverage its technology. This was "a major hurdle," a "formidable" task. However, the producers fell back on the old standby tools of information processing - people. They hired people, high school students to be clear.
The reporters sat in the hearing and "jotted down their reporting on notepads." Those are compilations of wood pulp that is cooked, pressed, rolled, dried, re-rolled, cut, and collated into groups called "pads." We used to write on them back in the day at Slate Rock and Gravel. No, CNN did not invent notepads.
When reporters finished a sheet of paper, next was "tearing off sheets . . . handing it one of the students." Those students ambulated on their tootsies, dogs, feet (you know, in your shoes) out of the hearing room to rejoin fellow students that were standing by in the hall. To these, they passed the note. Back in Mr. Worthy's third-grade class, we passed notes. CNN did not invent note-passing.
Those to whom notes were passed were "standing by at one of the courthouse’s only two pay phones." Pay phones were invented by William Gray in 1889, according to Atlas Obscura. Those students would use change to activate these payphones, call someone, and read the note to them. Those receiving the calls jotted down what was read to them. This, the "phone call" and the "pay phone" were not invented by CNN.
You want innovation? You should give some consideration to MARS (Military Auxilary Radio System), a system in which messages were passed from radio operator to radio operator. That started in 1925. In its day it was imaginative, innovative, and impressive. No, CNN did not invent MARS.
The folks that received those payphone calls from the students had to be local. It turns out that the payphones in that courthouse can only make local calls. This was a "twist" a "final obstacle." So, imagination was necessary, somehow someone had to be local to receive those calls. The innovators at CNN overcame this by locating a production assistant "in a nearby RV." According to the Smithsonian, "the first RV was hand built onto an automobile in 1904." No, CNN did not invent the RV.
The folks in the RV that received the calls "typed up the reporting and relayed the information to the . . .. Washington D.C. bureau." There it was vetted, edited, and "cleared for the air" and broadcast. No, CNN did not invent typing, relaying, vetting, editing, or broadcasting. The effort described was characterized by CNN as "remarkable." Hardly.
The network faulted the court for not allowing the cameras, cell phones, and other tools. It criticized the judge in particular and the court system generally for being "archaic." That is a valid perspective or opinion, but still an opinion. Would televised proceedings be better? Would cell phones in hearings really be that disruptive? We have a workers' compensation judge who keeps a "no cell phones" sign in a hearing room. That is humorous in a world in which most people's brains are encased in their cell phones. But, knowing that is a rule in a particular setting, regress to a calendar, a notepad, or other tool.
In the end, the innovation and imagination in this story is nothing but old-fashioned work practice. The innovation here was simply doing things the way they were done before cell phones. And it is important for us all to remember that was not that long ago. Sure, there were cell phones in 1973 (or at least one of them). They became a novelty in the 1980s. They became ubiquitous in the 1990s, and indispensable in the 21st Century. But that was just not that long ago. Humans functioned eons without these tools long before their recent ascendancy in importance.
As with the recent hubbub about AM radio, AM (June 2023), perhaps there is value in yesterday? Maybe life is a lot easier with our technology and our tools. But that said, perhaps there is value in remembering the manner in which we all managed somehow to do things in the old days? Maybe there is value in knowing how to write notes, verbalize thoughts, listen, interpret, reproduce, and communicate thoughts? Maybe it behooves us all to remember yesterday?
That time may come when you are confronted with the obstacle of a world in which convenience is lacking. There are many answers in our past. It is entertaining to see that CNN relied upon the past and covered the news with the help of some old-fashioned note-taking, phone calls, and dictation. It is not news in terms of ingenuity or imagination. It is news in that some today will believe it is news. That is more than a little sad.
