SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the paying-the-price-for-freedom-of-the-press dept.
[Public News Service of West Virginia Reporter Daniel Ralph Heyman] has been arrested and charged with "disruption of government services" in the state capitol for "yelling questions" at visiting Health and Human Services secretary Tom Price and White House senior advisor Kellyanne Conway.
[...] "The above defendant was aggressively breaching the secret service agents to the point where the agents were forced to remove him a couple of times from the area walking up the hallway in the main building of the Capitol," the complaint states. It adds Heyman caused a disturbance by "yelling questions at Ms. Conway and Secretary Price."
The misdemeanor carries a possible fine of $100 and up to six months in jail.
[...] The American Civil Liberties Union of West Virginia called the charges "outrageous" and said the arrest was "a blatant attempt to chill an independent, free press."
"Freedom of the press is being eroded every day, " it said in a statement. "We have a president who calls the media 'fake news' and resists transparency at every turn."
The statement said this is a "dangerous time in the country."
Price and Conway were in West Virginia to discuss opioid addiction in the state, which has the highest drug overdose death rate in the nation.
(Score: 4, Disagree) by jmorris on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:03PM (21 children)
Guy is a blogger with a poorly designed website making grandiose claims. USA Today willingly falls hook line and sinker for his act, but while "Public News Service" might sound like it is vaguely related to NPR, which is obviously intentional, and thus gets a pass as fellow members of the Blue Checkmark Mafia, it is just a front group for crazy.
But it doesn't matter because we are long past the point where anyone thinks 'journalist' is some special breed who gets to violate the norms of civilized behavior. Sorry, if I yelled at Mrs. Conway and Sec Price like that, if I were such an asshole the Secret Service had to bounce me, it is highly probable I'd see the inside of the bars in a cell for a bit. So why shouldn't this asshole? Discuss.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by its_gonna_be_yuge! on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:21PM (6 children)
Guy is a blogger with a poorly designed website making grandiose claims.
Well, the Public News Service of West Virginia has been around for 20 years and the website seems as good as most.
because we are long past the point where anyone thinks 'journalist' is some special breed who gets to violate the norms of civilized behavior.
They have to get their jobs done, and having a government which tries to thwart them and invalidate them makes that difficult.
How about this, since you want to discuss: The reporter was mildly aggressive when dealing with dishonest government representatives.
(Score: 0, Troll) by jmorris on Thursday May 11 2017, @07:01PM (5 children)
The actual website looks like it was designed twenty years ago but only claims 2007 for a start. You didn't think I posted without doing a quick Google search? You must be new around here. :)
They have to get their jobs done...
Their need isn't an enforceable demand on anyone else, they can behave like civilized people or be treated as the filthy animals they seem to be. We have no journalists and it is time everyone accepted that. For them journalism is not a profession, it is merely a tactic.
The reporter was mildly aggressive when dealing with dishonest government representatives.
The aggression is apparently (assuming video doesn't come out with a different set of facts) a fact, the dishonest is an assertion without evidence. You might want to learn the difference. Price hasn't even been in office long enough to support such a claim, especially since you don't (and won't) provide any evidence other than your own rage. You lost, suck it up buttercup.
It is like the "Russia! Russia! Russia!" idiocy. It has been about six months now and when questioned everyone in any position of power on the Left admits there is no evidence but instantly goes for the "There is as yet no evidence, which is why we must investigate, we must have a special prosecutor." Sorry, doesn't work that way, we don't do "Prosecute now, evidence later." Find some evidence or shut the hell up.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11 2017, @07:29PM
The actual website looks like it was designed twenty years ago but only claims 2007 for a start. You didn't think I posted without doing a quick Google search? You must be new around here. :)
I'm not new around here. That's why it was no surprise to me that your "quick google search" was bogus as shit.
The West Virginia bureau of the Public News Service was launched in 2007. The organization itself is 20 years old as the banner on their website says. Their website also says:
Last year the Public News Service produced over 4,000 stories featuring multiplatform public interest content that was picked up and re-distributed 100s of 1,000s of times on websites, local print outlets, radio and TV stations, plus on mobile devices. 1,000s of other websites and mobile devices. Nationally, an average of 60 outlets used each story.
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/about/mission.php [publicnewsservice.org]
Currently, tens of thousands of media outlets receive our content and more than 8,000 nationally are regularly using our stories, reaching a combined national weekly audience of Over 40 Million.
...
we manage independent news services in 36 states.
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/about.php [publicnewsservice.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Thursday May 11 2017, @07:38PM
> We have no journalists and it is time everyone accepted that.
Says who?
Freelance journalists have always existed. They used to publish in papers, now they can publish online.
The clowns on TV are not doing journalism, but that doesn't mean that no person ever does. You constitutional don't need a card to be a journalist.
> we don't do "Prosecute now, evidence later." Find some evidence or shut the hell up
Tell that to the 7 panels which investigated Benghazi after the first two said they didn't find any evidence...
The Republican-controlled Congress is "investigating" Russian interference in the 2016 US election. While most R members toe the line and ask useless questions to pass the time, they haven't killed the panel or stopped the subpoenas...
Whether they're looking for ammo against Trump (they'd like Pence better), worry about their next campaign being hacked, or can't properly bury the whole thing without looking extra bad, it's still not a liberal conspiracy when Hillary-killer Comey and the House and Senate Republicans are the one running the investigation.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11 2017, @08:27PM
It is hard to keep an investigation when every time is picks up steam, another person gets fired by the people being investigated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 12 2017, @12:11AM
Boot stomping fascist rubber stamping government abuse. Awesome job, keep it up. Or better yet, retire early to an island without modern communications and save us from your bullshit.
Trump's war on the media is finally resulting in some actual scary abuse. He was YELLING sir, lock him up he hurt my feewings!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 12 2017, @03:33PM
I've been here since very near the beginning and not doing a Google search has never stopped you from spewing nonsense before.
Plugging post-fact search terms into Google and finding alt-right fake news websites to "confirm" your claims is NOT a proper Google search.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bob_super on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:24PM
I need to point out how we essentially attempt to say the same thing, but your post is accusatory, condescending and confrontational...
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:27PM (5 children)
Ah, that's much simpler. Thank you for explaining.
I've been trying to figure out this whole time whether we have any witnesses or video footage to corroborate the administration's version of events, but I see now that such things aren't necessary.
He was arrested, therefore he did something wrong. Q.E.D.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:38PM (4 children)
What's actually happened should come out at trial, until then it's he-said she-said.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:40PM (2 children)
Since when do the authorities ever willingly film themselves interacting with the public?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:43PM
Politicians pretty conventionally do, up until January 2017, for some reason.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Thursday May 11 2017, @07:37PM
But I wasn't actually talking about the politician. If I got the story right, he was arrested by Secret Service. They probably have it from a half dozen cameras and at least as many mics.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11 2017, @07:40PM
Well presumably both sides have video,
Why do you presume that?
The guy wrote news articles, he didn't produce video segments.
And the secret service don't regularly wear bodycams.
(Score: 4, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday May 11 2017, @07:40PM
Guy is a blogger with a poorly designed website making grandiose claims.
I don't know what exactly happened here until we see some footage, but claiming the guy is merely a "blogger" is nonsense.
while "Public News Service" might sound like it is vaguely related to NPR, which is obviously intentional, and thus gets a pass as fellow members of the Blue Checkmark Mafia, it is just a front group for crazy.
Uh, no. Here's the main website [publicnewsservice.org] of this 20-year-old organization. In another post you assert a start-date of 2007, but that's only for the West Virginia branch of this national news outlet. There are some poor web design issues, but have a look here [publicnewsservice.org]. It's a network of state-based news services in 37 states, providing stories to over 8000 media outlets, and that link contains the following info: "In 2016, Public News Service produced 4,682 news stories which ran, conservatively, over 140,732 times on 3,818 radio stations, 1,089 print outlets and 201 television stations...."
You ever heard of American Public Media [americanpublicmedia.org] or maybe Public Radio International [pri.org]? They're also news outlets that produce programming and stories for distribution on things like NPR. I don't know much about Public News Service, but it sounds like a smaller player in this sort of thing which has focused on local state-based organizations to generate news content. I haven't really bothered to investigate this thoroughly, but it sounds like they distribute news stories mostly to local radio stations and local newspapers (and at cheaper rates than big services like AP and Reuters).
As for "public" in the name, it sounds like their model is some sort of unusual democratic thing where members can choose to fund specific news beats (which could be specific states/regions or specific topics), and that shapes the kind of stories they do. It does appear to slant "progressive" in its coverage, but lots of news outlets slant one way or another these days.
In any case, it's clearly not a huge organization, but it's not a random "blogger" either.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by charon on Thursday May 11 2017, @07:53PM (1 child)
So we don't like mainstream news media because they are too cozy with the government and are only mouthpieces. Check.
And we don't like independent news sources like bloggers because... um... their website looks old? And... err... they have to yell their questions because they are kept away from their subjects by a scrum of Secret Service agents? Check.
I guess if I want the news in DC, I should just pop down there myself and ask Mr. Trump what's up.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11 2017, @09:42PM
You might get a faster response if you tweet @realDonaldTrump. He's very honest, the most honest person I know. He wouldn't... I mean, come on. Mr. Trump is a good guy. A very, very good guy. He'll respond to all of your questions, all of them. Believe me, all of them. He's very, very on top of things, on top of a lot of things. Mr. Trump is absolutely the most honest guy, he's the best guy, absolutely fantastic. Believe me, he's the best.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Thursday May 11 2017, @08:45PM
1) First amendment is not limited to some set of "official" reporters.
2) The Gov't knows that the best way to eliminate rights for all people, is to start with the ones people generally despise. Our domestic mass surveillance system is based on making sure a purse snatcher/stalker did his year (or whatever) in jail rather then get off on a technicality. As it turns out, those "technicalities" are the difference between a Constitutional Republic/Democracy, and straight up tyranny. But all people ever see is the asshole in the first case, and after that, it's done and over for everyone eventually.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday May 11 2017, @09:56PM
Well, if it's OK to laud the guy that did the "expose" on ACORN, then why the hate for this guy? Shouldn't we favor independent citizen journalists asking hard, inconvenient questions of the high and mighty? We all know the mainstream media have no interest in doing that at all.
There is a lamentable element of attention-seeking at that level, but at the same time do the stuffed shirt faux-journalists on TV do any different? They are all narcissists; it's practically in the job description.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Friday May 12 2017, @08:45AM
> Sorry, if I yelled at Mrs. Conway and Sec Price [...] it is highly probable I'd see the inside of the bars in a cell for a bit. So why shouldn't this asshole?
Because freedom. Specifically, freedom of speech includes the freedom to yell. Note the word "or" in this passage, distinguishing it from "freedom of the press":
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.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday May 12 2017, @02:20PM
The whole question is: at what point does the Secret Service "have to intervene" ?
Is it when the man is physically breaching established boundaries in space, or is it when his voice is reaching Mrs. Conway and Mr. Price at an audible, understandable volume? Interestingly, what is the overlap between the two, if any?
🌻🌻 [google.com]