In the age of digital media, it seems everyone has an opinion.  Granted, this has probably been true throughout the history of mankind—the difference now, though, is that virtually everyone has a venue for their voice to be heard, from online forums, to blogging, to Twitter.  There are probably a million benefits to this type of instant, widespread communication—for example, now we have previously unheard of access to politicians, news outlets, and the such—but digital communications have led to millions of regrets as well.

Take Aaron Rodgers, the Greenbay Packers’ Quarterback, for example.  After taking to Twitter to unequivocally support Ryan Braun, of the Milwaukee Brewers, when Braun was accused of using illegal performance enhancing drugs, a little more than a year later, Rodgers has had to back track, as Braun has essentially been found guilty.  More embarrassingly for Rodgers, when tweeting back to a fan, he said “ya I’d put my salary next year on it,” in confessing his confidence in Braun’s innocence.  While it’s unclear whether he would actually follow through with that (though I highly doubt he would, considering how many millions he makes a year), what has become increasingly clear is that whatever is posted online tends to become permanent, even after deletion.

In light of this, it seems—not so much odd, as potentially unsafe—that some federal judges have taken to the blogosphere.  As a recent article points out, several—though not many—judges have their own personal blogs, or are substantive contributors to others’ blogs, and that recently a senior U.S. District Judge, Richard Kopf, posted a statement on his blog many have perceived to be controversial, writing “A lot of what the Supreme Court does is simply irrelevant to what federal trial judges do on a daily basis.”

While Judge Kopf’s post does not warrant Rodgers-level blushes (in fact it probably doesn’t warrant any at all), it is interesting to see how increasing mass-communication applications will affect the legal and judicial fields, especially in regards to the ethical rules for judges.  It seems unlikely that judges will ever be tweeting live updates on a case, but given the increasing prevalence of such technology—even within the courtroom, by, among others, reporters (although many judges have banned tweeting)—more may enter the digital world, raising the question of how social media will affect our judicial system.