Posted on 08/29/2014 10:28:31 AM PDT by Citizen Zed
Since Brown’s death, local or state police have arrested or detained at least 11 reporters or photographers, according to a running tab on the Poynter Institute’s website. Even Amnesty International sent human-rights observers to the city to support free speech and press — the first time it’s done so in this country.
Among the first and most widely reported incidents was when Washington Post reporter Wesley Lowery and Huffington Post reporter Ryan Reilly were arrested and briefly put in a holding cell after police ordered them to leave a McDonalds. Lowery was “illegally instructed to stop taking video of officers” in the McDonalds, as Washington Post executive editor Martin D. Baron later wrote, and then “slammed against a soda machine and handcuffed.”
In fact, while it is illegal in some states to record other people without their consent, federal courts have upheld a First Amendment right to record police as they perform their official duties in public, unless the person with the camera is interfering with police work.
At least some of the police in Ferguson apparently interpreted “interference” too broadly in the fog of tear gas and other mayhem.
(Excerpt) Read more at dispatch.com ...
Have read the whole Constitution and nowhere does it say anything about the Press having special privileges not granted to the rest of us.
If a member of the Press is doing something that would get him arrested if a member of the public, then he should be arrested too.
When the press makes themselves willing harlots for one political party with ZERO accountability or objectivity of any kind, it kinda tempers my “give a damn-ometer” what happens to them.
They’re just reaping the fruits of their labors.
That they fail to see it is the funny part.
I’m just surprised that Clarence is still alive.
“Freedom of the press is in danger in this country, too”
So?
Dont look for people protecting the 2nd amendment to come save you whores.
But I bet Page totally supports the impending ‘truthy’ czar. The Obama Admin’s ‘nonpartisan’ Organizing for America lackey who will be monitoring the Internet for ‘hate speech’ and compiling a list of offenders. I suspect the Czar will also be determining what IS hate speech and what isn’t.
Clarence is a joke.
Then you weren't paying attention.
The Press is the only industry specifically mentioned in the Constitution's First Amendment.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The press being the source of information for the People to know what their government is up to their rights MUST be protected. And that means that the cops do NOT have the authority to order reporter, photographers, and videographers to stop what they're doing. Yet too many criminals with badges take it upon themselves to beat up practically anyone who has the nerve to photograph or video them in public.
While I'm not so enamored of 92% of the media being Democrats I am less enamored of the cops who act like cockroaches because they can't stand the light of scrutiny.
If a member of the Press is doing something that would get him arrested if a member of the public, then he should be arrested too.
The Press gets no right to break laws that apply to the rest of us because they're members of the Press.
Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom ... of the press
So what is that freedom? The absolute right to print anything they choose. Nothing more, nothing less. (Subject, of course, to after the fact suit for libel and such.)
Nowhere does it say that they get the right to break laws if it helps them get a story. Nowhere does it say a curfew that applies to everyone else can be ignored if I'm a reporter.
In today's world, the distinction is meaningless anyway. In 10 minutes I can have a blog up and running. Hey, look at me! I'm a member of the press and don't have to obey the laws the rest of you idiots do!
BTW, nowhere did I say the cops were right if they ordered the press to stop recording their actions. But then they wouldn't be right to do the same if those recording were NOT members of the press.
However, if the cops are clearing an area for legitimate public safety reasons, the press has to leave, too.
Sorry. All I see are thugs assaulting people who haven’t done anything wrong.
Case in point from today’s news:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=867_1409254807
I have never, ever said the cops in Ferguson are doing their job properly. Simply that the laws that apply to the rest of us also apply to the press. No special privileges.
For instance, any reasonable person will recognize that a lot of these leaks of classified information are the result of a conspiracy between the reporter and the perp. They get together ahead of time and decide what info to steal. That’s conspiracy and a felony.
There was a case a few years back where a reporter infiltrated a Food Lion to do an expose of their practices. Good one, too. But he broke a number of laws in the process. Does he get a pass because he’s a reporter? I don’t think he should.
It is possible to make a case that the public interest means reporters should be given special leeway in breaking laws in order to get a story. Fine. Push for a state or federal law that gives them such rights. But it isn’t in the Constitution.
Back on topic: The reporters at the McDonalds in Ferguson did nothing wrong and the rat bastards in the storm trooper costumes didn’t have a right to order the reporters to stop filming.
I was objecting to the topic, the notion that the press guys should have been treated differently from anybody else present.
IOW, I am saying that the privileges the press is claiming for itself should be extended to all of us, not limited to them.
I think that’s very different from a defense of police actions.
Ah. In the Glik decision the three judge panel unanimously agreed with you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glik_v._Cunniffe
And while I agree with them that any citizen acting as a reporter should be treated as a reporter I don't want the special place of the press to apply to everyone. Because if it applies to everyone then it applies to no one at all and then cops firing tear gas and rubber bullets at the media will become socially and legally acceptable.
The ivory tower does not approve of your logic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.