Would New Zealanders learn more or get better judgments from a Supreme Court that was not only open to the public but could be watched on line, perhaps live or in podcasts?

I suspect not, based on my experience of television camera effects on the quality of deliberations in Parliamentary Select Committee. Serious debate, frankness, willingness to explore others' points of view all disappeared until the camera left as all involved postured to get the 15 second clip that might bolster their particular brand.

Camera coverage appears to offer an unchallengeably fair and accurate report.  Constituents see what is actually said, as it is said. But editing can create a completely misleading impression. Fragments may lose all context without losing the appearance of accuracy.

Of course print media can also misquote out of context. But there is a protection. Readers know they are relying on the fairness of the reporter and editor. Accordingly those wielding the pen seem to  accept more responsibility to convey context.

That discipline seems to be reduced where the camera does the reporting, and it "does not lie".

Posturing for the camera should be less tempting to judges.  Tenure means they don't have to cultivate their following to keep their jobs, though vanity might be enough to induce unwanted camera consciousness. 

Still I am inclined toward the arguments of Wendy Kaminer in the Atlantic, commenting on the likely demise of a Bill to require televising of US Supreme Court proceedings. Perhaps broadcasting should be permitted on request, so long as no sequence is less than say 10 minutes unbroken (to protect against out of context editing).

This is unlikely to be a serious constitutional issue. I think there is enough protection of open justice in our Supreme Court if its hearings are open to public attendance, and to print media, and written submissions are available to search and it must publish its decisions.

The biggest contribution we could make to open justice would be to abolish name suppression, and to re-open all kinds of courts to public attendance and print reporting, including family and youth court proceedings.