The history of media interest in trials that catch the attention of the public shows that both the public and the media seek maximum use of existing technology to inform the public about what is happening in specific cases. The concern of the courts has been that overly intrusive media coverage of a trial may undermine the defendant's right to a fair trial. In its "Estes" decision of 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the mere presence of television cameras in the courtroom had a detrimental psychological impact on jurors, witnesses, judges, and the defendant; however, no empirical support substantiated this opinion. In Chandler v. Florida (1981), the U.S. Supreme Court held that since there was no showing or prejudice of a constitutional dimension due to the televising of trials, Florida could permit electronic media coverage of trials in its State courts. As of 1994, 47 States allow cameras in their trial or appellate courts on either a permanent or experimental basis. Although some cases might require restrictions on broadcast media coverage, the advantages of such coverage of most court proceedings far outweigh the disadvantages. 58 footnotes