Posted on 08/26/2020 6:39:41 AM PDT by Kaslin
In Oregon, if you witness someone being assaulted and want to record the incident when you intervene, you may freely (and, hopefully, quickly) activate the recording device on your smartphone, pocket it, and document your efforts. But suppose, instead, that you came upon the scene of the crime just after it happened. If you hit record, conceal your phone and catch the assailant confessing to what hes just done, you yourself have committed a misdemeanor for secretly recording.
That is just part of the maze that is Oregons recording law. It regulates not only eavesdropping, or snooping in on the conversations of others, but recording your own conversations secretly and even recording them openly. Thats right: in most circumstances, if you openly and obviously record someone with a video camera or other device without specifically informing him that youre doing so, you are risking the same misdemeanor conviction.
This is not only absurd, its unconstitutional. The First Amendment does not just protect your ability to speak freely, but your ability to document what you see and hear, including with audio recording.
Oregons recording law seriously censors journalism. Consider the hazards to covering the events in Portland in the last few months, where thousands of protesters have clashed with federal and local law enforcement every night. A lot of this has been recorded, and perhaps legally one of the laws exceptions allows openly recording rallies but one-on-one conversations amidst the protestors? Secretly recording an interaction is illegal, open recording alone is probably illegal, and specifically informing plenty of the protestors of recording is a good way to get hurt, or perhaps killed.
This is not speculation: journalists from print media have been attacked at the Portland protests just for being there. Project Veritas, as Americas premier investigative journalism organization, intends to investigate the protests and other happenings in Oregon in the safest way possiblethat is, by going undercover. But its journalists cannot simply pose as protestors and then openly record or announce the recording: obviously, that defeats the entire concept of undercover. Oregon must amend its law to permit a secret recording of ones own conversations in most circumstances: free speech should be the rule, not the exception. But time is of the essence, and new legislation cant come quickly enough, so this week Project Veritas filed a federal lawsuit in Portland to stop the enforcement of the current law.
Undercover journalism and secret recording bother some people, especially those whose candid words are truthfully captured and published, free from the window dressing put on statements that are, as mainstream journalists say, on the record. Thats no reason to outlaw it. And the importance of fixing the law goes far beyond Project Veritas: earlier this year, news reports about attempts to organize a union at the Columbia Sportswear Company in Portland included quotes taken from recordings made by workers of management at meetings discouraging unionization. These recordings should not put the workers at risk of misdemeanor charges.
The law should protect citizens from eavesdropping. Indeed, another Oregon law that is not subject to Project Veritass lawsuit does just that. But other recording laws must recognize that anothers right to privacy does not include preventing you from accurately recording what youre told. The Constitution demands no less.
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.