SYMBOLIC AND ACTUAL BARRIERS TO PUBLIC OBSERVATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF COURTROOM PROCEEDINGS ARE POINTED OUT, AS ARE STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS AND RULE CHANGES THAT HAVE REDUCED SECRECY IN THE COURTS. THE NEED FOR GREATER OPENNESS IN THE AREA OF JUDICIAL RULEMAKING IS CITED. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT NO COURT RULE SHOULD BECOME EFFECTIVE UNTIL IT IS PUBLISHED, SO THAT OBJECTIONS CAN BE RAISED. A MORE ENLIGHTENED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE COURTS AND THE PRESS IS URGED AS A STEP THAT WOULD CONTRIBUTE SIGNIFICANTLY TO REDUCING THE 'INNER SANCTUM' ILLUSION SURROUNDING THE BENCH. CALIFORNIA'S EXPERIMENT WITH THE APPOINTMENT OF PRESS OFFICERS TO STATE COURTS AND THE U.S. SUPREME COURT'S TECHNIQUE OF PROVIDING PRESS BRIEFINGS BY LAW PROFESSORS ARE CITED. LIVE OR TAPED TELEVISION AND RADIO COVERAGE OF APPELLATE AND MOTION-LEVEL PROCEEDINGS IS RECOMMENDED. IT IS ARGUED THAT, ALTHOUGH THE SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL MUST BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, CONSTITUTIONAL AND PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS DO NOT WARRANT ABSOLUTE BARRIERS TO THE BROADCAST OF CIVIL OR CRIMINAL TRIALS. THE USE OF TELEVISED TRIALS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES BY LAW SCHOOLS IS NOTED AND ENCOURAGED. OLD PREJUDICES REGARDING THE ELECTRONIC MEDIA NEED TO BE ABANDONED AND THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO KNOW SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED. NOTES ARE PROVIDED. (LKM)