Question from a reader:
Recently, while observing Nakai’s situation, I’ve been thinking about the lawyers who appear on variety shows. I can’t help but feel that they might not be very strong in an actual courtroom. It seems like their arguments are easily swayed, and they often bring up exceptional cases as if they represent the general opinion. It feels like
they are catering to public sentiment, and I worry that if they made the same arguments in court, they would lose. I believe that lawyers who win in court tend to be more reserved and often cut right to the point with the judge when necessary. What are your thoughts on this?
The Role of Lawyers in Variety Shows vs. Their Real Courtroom Skills
Recently, observing Nakai’s situation made me reflect on the role of lawyers in variety shows. While they present strong arguments in front of viewers, I question whether those same arguments would hold up in an actual trial. Having worked part-time at a judicial scrivener’s office, I feel I understand a bit about the posture and strategies of lawyers in court. In reality, trials primarily involve written exchanges, and whether a lawyer speaks a lot or not is less significant. In court, it’s essential to make precise arguments on behalf of clients, and sometimes it takes courage to directly confront the judge.
Differences Between Variety Shows and Courtrooms
Lawyers who appear on variety shows certainly aim to appeal to the audience. Their job is to provide entertaining stories and unexpected perspectives that capture the viewers’ interest. They are invited on television because they have a certain level of achievement. While courtroom lawyers do not completely avoid making claims, it is clear that “entertainment value” takes precedence in variety shows. I once spoke with a lawyer who said, “Court is a battle, but variety is entertainment.” That statement left a strong impression on me. While the skill of a lawyer is undoubtedly important, I realized how crucial it is to convey messages and charm to the audience.
Strength in Court vs. Strength in Variety Shows
In my opinion, lawyers who win in court often have a more reserved style, speaking up only when necessary. In contrast, in variety shows, the key is how well they can present their opinions in an entertaining manner. There’s a significant difference here. While it may seem that lawyers in variety shows are catering to public sentiment, that is also part of their job. However, I think it can be tough to have one’s capabilities questioned simply for appearing on television. Viewers may wonder, “Are they just as strong in court?” The reality is that courtroom battles are a different beast altogether, and variety is just that—variety. Perhaps the true skill lies in how well they navigate both arenas.
What Do You Think?
Now that you’ve read this far, I would love to hear your thoughts. What do you think about lawyers appearing on variety shows? If you’ve felt anything regarding the difference between lawyers in court and their televised personas, please share. I hope we can exchange opinions and deepen our understanding together. I look forward to your comments!
