4 ms·

It's no more or less disturbing for journalists to be subjected to this. They're not some special class of protected people.

papito 7y ago
Their phones can expose sources that depend on discretion, and it's not farfetched for some MAGA TSA agent to ratf--k a journalist.
- mattr47 7y ago
  This has being going on well before the current presidential administration. Try not to get triggered next time.
- vuln 7y ago
  Try again. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jennifergranick/2014/03/20/obama-press-attacks-degrade-the-first-amendment-in-the-name-of-security/#33ae58a74f6f https://www.forbes.com/sites/jennifergranick/2014/03/20/obam... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/10/cpi-report-press-freedoms-obama https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/10/cpi-re... https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleblowers-stuxnet-leaks-drones/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleb... https://www.businessinsider.com/james-risen-case-obama-journalism-press-freedom-2014-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/james-risen-case-obama-journ... https://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/obamas_personal_role_in_a_journalists_imprisonment/ https://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/obamas_personal_role_in_a_j...
lonelappde 7y ago
On the one hand, it's extra bad because searching a journalist leads to an additional violation: freedom on the press. On th other hand, we should not think of 1A rights as rights that only specialists or professionals need. (Much like we shouldn't think of police as relieving civilians of their duty to help maintain law and order and safety. Police augment and assist citizens, as public servants.)
- djsumdog 7y ago
  Except that we can all journalists really. There's no professional mandate. Go to rallies and make videos and post them on your political blog? You should be considered a journalist.
- vuln 7y ago
  Every person with a laptop / cellphone and a thought can be a journalist. See the Opinion column on big news sites...
dboreham 7y ago
Hmm...I thought they actually were a special class of protected people.
- jessaustin 7y ago
  They'd like us to believe that. That's why they appropriated the term "the press" for themselves when it originally referred to a machine that was used to print. When 1A mentions "freedom... of the press", it's as one of a group of rights that apply to all people, not a group of different parties that have rights. That is, 1A protects everyone's freedom to operate a printing press, or use some other means of publishing and distribution that might have been invented since then.
  - girvo 7y ago
    I’d like to learn more about your interpretation of what “the press” is referring to; it strikes me as interesting that “operating a printing press” would be the explicitly enumerated right in such a (mostly) broad text, but then I am aware of the cultural differences over that many years means it’s not out of the realm of possibility. Do you have any articles or books I could read about this?
    - gamblor956 7y ago
      Back then, the "press" was the only method of communication other than actually talking to people. But the point was that the government couldn't infringe a method of communication. EDIT: Note, for example, that the Federalist Papers that drove much of the discussion behind the policies in the Constitution were self-printed by Franklin, et al. Newspapers at that time were highly political and opinionated, like Fox News today, and did very little actual reporting of news. Journalists and "the press" didn't get conflated until much later.
    - bcrosby95 7y ago
      The point is the government can't arbitrarily take away your medium of communication you legally own and use. Barring random specific issues (such as noise ordinances), if you own a megaphone (metaphorical or not) you can use it to spread your speech. If people could only exercise free speech by whispering quietly to themselves then it may as well not exist. You could start by reading wikipedia about freedom of the press.
JaRail 7y ago
It's a lot more disturbing if other parts of the government can arbitrarily target people they don't like for harassment. There's a big difference between 10 random searches and 10 targeted searches. Journalists aren't that common. If there's a large cluster of journalists getting targeted in a close period of time, it's worth figuring out why that's happening.
eeZah7Ux 7y ago
You are making a strawman: they are not a special "class" indeed. But they have a very special position and role that makes them specially vulnerable when dealing with powerful institutions.
mancerayder 7y ago
You might argue journalists (amongst others) might be more subject to retaliatory harassment than ordinary people.
tghw 7y ago
The freedom of the press is specifically called out for a reason.
- strictnein 7y ago
  The freedom of press in the 1st amendment refers to the printing press and the owners of those presses didn't want to be restricted on what they could print or be forced to print things they disagreed with. It was not, in any way, intended to refer to "journalists", a group whose only defining characteristic appears to be employment by a certain group of private companies.

papito 7y ago

Their phones can expose sources that depend on discretion, and it's not farfetched for some MAGA TSA agent to ratf--k a journalist.

mattr47 7y ago
This has being going on well before the current presidential administration. Try not to get triggered next time.
vuln 7y ago
Try again. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jennifergranick/2014/03/20/obama-press-attacks-degrade-the-first-amendment-in-the-name-of-security/#33ae58a74f6f https://www.forbes.com/sites/jennifergranick/2014/03/20/obam... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/10/cpi-report-press-freedoms-obama https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/10/cpi-re... https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleblowers-stuxnet-leaks-drones/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleb... https://www.businessinsider.com/james-risen-case-obama-journalism-press-freedom-2014-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/james-risen-case-obama-journ... https://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/obamas_personal_role_in_a_journalists_imprisonment/ https://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/obamas_personal_role_in_a_j...

lonelappde 7y ago

On the one hand, it's extra bad because searching a journalist leads to an additional violation: freedom on the press. On th other hand, we should not think of 1A rights as rights that only specialists or professionals need. (Much like we shouldn't think of police as relieving civilians of their duty to help maintain law and order and safety. Police augment and assist citizens, as public servants.)

djsumdog 7y ago
Except that we can all journalists really. There's no professional mandate. Go to rallies and make videos and post them on your political blog? You should be considered a journalist.
vuln 7y ago
Every person with a laptop / cellphone and a thought can be a journalist. See the Opinion column on big news sites...

dboreham 7y ago

Hmm...I thought they actually were a special class of protected people.

jessaustin 7y ago
They'd like us to believe that. That's why they appropriated the term "the press" for themselves when it originally referred to a machine that was used to print. When 1A mentions "freedom... of the press", it's as one of a group of rights that apply to all people, not a group of different parties that have rights. That is, 1A protects everyone's freedom to operate a printing press, or use some other means of publishing and distribution that might have been invented since then.
- girvo 7y ago
  I’d like to learn more about your interpretation of what “the press” is referring to; it strikes me as interesting that “operating a printing press” would be the explicitly enumerated right in such a (mostly) broad text, but then I am aware of the cultural differences over that many years means it’s not out of the realm of possibility. Do you have any articles or books I could read about this?
  - gamblor956 7y ago
    Back then, the "press" was the only method of communication other than actually talking to people. But the point was that the government couldn't infringe a method of communication. EDIT: Note, for example, that the Federalist Papers that drove much of the discussion behind the policies in the Constitution were self-printed by Franklin, et al. Newspapers at that time were highly political and opinionated, like Fox News today, and did very little actual reporting of news. Journalists and "the press" didn't get conflated until much later.
  - bcrosby95 7y ago
    The point is the government can't arbitrarily take away your medium of communication you legally own and use. Barring random specific issues (such as noise ordinances), if you own a megaphone (metaphorical or not) you can use it to spread your speech. If people could only exercise free speech by whispering quietly to themselves then it may as well not exist. You could start by reading wikipedia about freedom of the press.

JaRail 7y ago

It's a lot more disturbing if other parts of the government can arbitrarily target people they don't like for harassment. There's a big difference between 10 random searches and 10 targeted searches. Journalists aren't that common. If there's a large cluster of journalists getting targeted in a close period of time, it's worth figuring out why that's happening.

eeZah7Ux 7y ago

You are making a strawman: they are not a special "class" indeed. But they have a very special position and role that makes them specially vulnerable when dealing with powerful institutions.

mancerayder 7y ago

You might argue journalists (amongst others) might be more subject to retaliatory harassment than ordinary people.

tghw 7y ago

The freedom of the press is specifically called out for a reason.

strictnein 7y ago
The freedom of press in the 1st amendment refers to the printing press and the owners of those presses didn't want to be restricted on what they could print or be forced to print things they disagreed with. It was not, in any way, intended to refer to "journalists", a group whose only defining characteristic appears to be employment by a certain group of private companies.