SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Snopes reports
Six journalists could spend up to 10 years in prison after being arrested during protests against President Donald Trump's inauguration.
The Guardian identified the journalists as freelancer Aaron Cantú; Vocativ senior producer Evan Engel; Jack Keller, producer for the online documentary Story of America; independent journalists Matt Hopard and Shay Horse; and RT America reporter Alex Rubinstein.
The group was charged under a District of Columbia statute penalizing "every person who willfully incited or urged others to engage" in a riot causing more than $5,000 in property damage with the potential 10-year prison sentence and a fine of up to $25,000. More than 200 people in total were arrested the day of the 20 January 2017 inauguration; they were reportedly arraigned the following day and will be back in court in February and March.
[...] Another independent journalist and documentarian, Tim Pool, said on Twitter that he and two NBC News journalists were also arrested during the 20 January 2017 demonstrations but released without charges. Pool said that a supervising officer told him "no less than three times" that they were under arrest. NBC News has not responded to our request for comment regarding Pool's account.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26 2017, @10:38PM
If they have press badges, or can produce the required paperwork, then they can film from wherever they'd like.
What? You shouldn't need badges or paperwork to be a journalist. Anyone could be considered to be part of the press.
(Score: 2) by Username on Thursday January 26 2017, @11:00PM
Pretty much sums it up. Everyone is a journalist now. We should be judging them by actions not by profession or hobby. They obviously did something to gain the attention of the police officers. Most likely some publicity stunt.
(Score: 5, Informative) by sjames on Thursday January 26 2017, @11:25PM
Sadly these days, that something could be getting a cop on video. They hate when there's evidence and they don't control it.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Spamalope on Friday January 27 2017, @12:56AM
Exactly. The press has no power or right above anyone else, and today regular folks *who are there* with a cell phone camera are often primary news sources. Being there with a camera may mean you record something that the mainstream media will buy, just like they would from any stringer.
Trying to force a Trump narrative into this is a mistake. The very public threats of violence resulted in a 'standard' response. That standard is the problem. If this were a WTO summit we've seem similar actions. This looks like a (sadly) bog standard contempt of cop arrest and charge them all situation, perhaps amplified by trying to control a potential riot situation. The Nation as a whole has been allowing this militarization of the Police, really since the war on drugs. It's a mistake or partisan politics to lay it at the feet of one group. (the whole Us VS them mentality has to be broken, and the law and incentives that create it removed or there will be continual strife - and both political parties have had a hand in that)
Some arrests may have been exactly because they had a camera. Police in some areas will go after anyone filming to destroy the camera/recording.
Take a look at Radley Balkos writing for the Washigton Post for info about the changes in policing in the US that have led to this sort of action being commonplace.
For photography/journalism www.photographyisnotacrime.com is a left leaning activist website about police antagonism towards journalists and photographers. (I'm an amateur photographer, and became aware of them from coverage of a false arrest to destroy the video evidence arrest. My politics don't align with theirs, but I find the issues they cover valid even if they stray into more partisan and/or whiny areas part of the time) I became more interested after seeing NOLA police attack a photographer before going after hippies for having an unauthorized (but legal as they were doing it) parade. They waited for a spot with several street lights out. I infer they knew cell phone cameras wouldn't work, but that one guy's SLR would so he was singled out despite being a bystander.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 27 2017, @01:27AM
The press has no power or right above anyone else
...unless you notice that that is the ONLY profession mentioned in the Constitution.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 27 2017, @02:00PM
But anyone could be considered to be part of the press, and the Constitution also guarantees freedom of speech. I see no reason the press would have more rights when anyone could be part of the press; the distinction is less useful now.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday January 27 2017, @03:48PM
There's a lot of stuff mentioned in the Constitution that is only in there because the British were doing specifically those things. If it were written today, nobody would feel the need to mention quartering troops in your home either.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"