After outlining the history of the use of cameras in the courtroom and the reasons why the Federal courts and many State courts have barred their presence, the article analyzes the applicability of standards in right-to-evidence cases to adverse media coverage of a defense witness' testimony. The discussion notes that the defendant's right should be balanced against the countervailing policy interests favoring public access to legal proceedings. An examination of the general approaches taken by the States in addressing cameras in the courtroom finds that none adequately balances the competing interests of the defendant and the media. The proposed standard indicates a procedure to determine whether witnesses' objections to camera coverage are bona fide and to weigh first amendment interests and interests in efficient judicial administration. The proposed approach will create a concrete record from which an appellate court can more easily determine whether camera coverage has resulted in a constitutional violation. The proposed procedural safeguards are more protective of defendants' compulsory process rights than many existing State standards without ignoring first amendment concerns. 158 footnotes.