Many judges, lawyers, journalists, and jurors assert that pretrial publicity rarely prejudices the outcome of a trial. Such assertions are based largely on personal experience, informal observation, and anecdote. Systematic research shows, however, that prejudicial pretrial publicity can and does bias verdicts. There is far less direct evidence on why this bias occurs. Different types of pretrial publicity may affect verdicts through different routes. Trial court judges have a variety of remedies available to combat biasing effects of pretrial publicity. There are four remedies that are common and for which relevant behavioral research exists: granting a continuance, conducting extensive voir dire, instructing jurors to disregard pretrial publicity, and self-policing by the jury during deliberation. With few exceptions, research consistently calls into question the effectiveness of these remedies. Such research does not and cannot prove that pretrial publicity will bias jury decisionmaking in any particular trial. Still, it should alert the press, the courts, the bar, and the public not to ignore the genuine risks of intensive pretrial publicity. 56 footnotes