33 ms·

Record Breaking Number of Journalists Arrested in the U.S. This Year

503 points by infodocket 6y ago

umvi 6y ago
> The vast majority of these arrests occurred while journalists were documenting the historic, nationwide protests over the police killing of George Floyd and in support of Black Lives Matter. So basically, it's not a coincidence - police are more likely to arrest journalists that are attending anti-police protests. And it's sort of understandable. Imagine you are a police officer called to go to a protest where everyone there hates your guts, calls for you to lose your job, and bad actors instigate confrontation, throw stuff at you, etc. The escalated tensions probably adds way more stress to the officers there and they snap and start doing heavy handed policing because they want the protest to be over so they can go home.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  They don't get to snap.
  - arabelladonna 6y ago
    This. The last thing that anyone should want to hear is that the police are snapping under high-pressure situations, which are the situations where the average citizen is going to need them the most level-headed.
- makeworld 6y ago
  Was anyone suggesting it was a coincidence? It makes sense more journalists were arrested, but it's still notable.
  - conductr 6y ago
    It’s also not like they have press cards in their hat or some press pass lanyard. They look like everyone else and are probably recording/photographing like everyone else. An arrest by itself doesn’t mean much in this context. But I assume they are released once they can be proven to be a journalist and no charges are brought.
    - jakelazaroff 6y ago
      That's not a particularly moving defense. There are no de jure rights afforded specifically to journalists (whatever your definition). And even if there were, the threat of arrest is still an intimidation tactic the police can use to subjugate civilians — journalist or not.
      - conductr 6y ago
        If you want to ignore the context I mentioned and make this a broad statement about policing in the US that’s fine but it’s also a completely different topic. Generally speaking, journalists are allowed to do their jobs and have a low risk of being arrested. They got caught up in the mix of the riots not dispersing as ordered, is my take. It’s not a trend or a bigger statement about the nations criminal justice system, no matter how flawed. This data shows nothing when context is applied.
  - umvi 6y ago
    Well I went into the article (based on the title) thinking police all over the nation were randomly deciding to arrest journalists more often. But this makes it clear that no, it's only journalists at anti-police protests getting arrested at elevated rates. This article could very well have been titled "Record Breaking Number of Anti-Police Protests in U.S. This Year"
- advisedwang 6y ago
  It is understandable that the police want to arrest the press when the press is reporting on a movement against police brutality. Its still bad.
- ausbah 6y ago
  police don't nor should get to brutalize civilians just because they don't like being called out for the corruption and abuse of power rampant in their profession
  - umvi 6y ago
    I'm not saying it's right, just that it's understandable. To use a software analogy it would be like if for your job you were forced to help make a website for anti-software developers who hate you and your profession, and you are treated poorly while trying to do your job. That environment is not going to cultivate craftsmanship to say the least. The right thing to do is to dutifully and professionally execute your tasks, but in reality people have emotions and some software engineers in that position might sabotage the project out of spite.
    - zug_zug 6y ago
      Well "understandable" sounds dangerously close to acceptable. Because it's foreseeable departments need to be extra judicious in which officers they send into emotionally charged situations, officers lacking self-control are going to do the country more harm than good in protest situations.
      - umvi 6y ago
        Indeed. I think it's important to humanize the police officers and acknowledge that they are people with emotions too though. Protestors can get angry and smash/burn stuff, police can get angry and arrest people and disperse crowds. People are people, and this situation is particularly tricky because the opposing parties do not like each other. In an ideal world only the cream of the crop would be sent to police these protests, but I would wager most police departments are understaffed and have to make do.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- postalrat 6y ago
  Maybe I'm wrong but it seemed like anyone could go in there with a camera and "journalist" written onto their shirt and behave like they don't need to follow orders from the police.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    Why are the Police giving anyone orders unless they're committing a crime?
    - postalrat 6y ago
      Who said they weren't commit a crime? Many, if not most, were.
      - chrisseaton 6y ago
        When they complain about journalists being arrested... I'm guessing they are implicitly limiting that to non-criminal journalists.
    - 8note 6y ago
      Police don't need to know of you're committing a crime, only think that you might be. It's up to the courts whether you did If a cop thinks it's illegal to have your shoes untied, or to be jogging, they can arrest you
      - chrisseaton 6y ago
        That's a circular argument. Why are the police giving orders to people at all? If they think they're committing a crime, arrest them. Otherwise, leave them alone.
- tjr225 6y ago
  > The escalated tensions probably adds way more stress to the officers there and they snap and start doing heavy handed policing because they want the protest to be over so they can go home. If they can’t manage the stress in a way that doesn’t prevent them from doing their job correctly they should be fired. The same logic applies to you or I, what is so special about the police?
  - 8note 6y ago
    They have a strong union.
- rsynnott 6y ago
  In that case, they should perhaps consider taking a job more commensurate with their abilities. Policing is difficult. That's not an excuse for doing it badly. Anyone who can't do it properly should be retrained, fired, or in some of the cases which occurred recently, criminally prosecuted.
  - umvi 6y ago
    Unless you ramp up pay in order to get better talent, this is just a recipe to have understaffed police units.
buttholesurfer 6y ago
Well considering how many "journalists" there are/were at these BLM riots... im not surprised. Basically everyone with a cellphone and a twitch stream thinks they are a journalist. Not to mention most the said "journalists" are very biased.
NDizzle 6y ago
What's their definition of journalist here? Journalists, at these protests, that were arrested? In other words, how many twitter followers do I need before I can identify as a journalist?!
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  I wonder if there's any countries that specifically recognise people as journalists? Like how police officers have a warrant and specific powers and accountability, could legitimate journalists be recognised, empowered and held accountable like that? Then it could also be an offence to impersonate them. Otherwise yeah a journalist is just some random person claiming to be a journalist and I'm not sure what could be done about that?
  - indigochill 6y ago
    Among the professional journalists I've known (quite a few since I went to journalism school and worked in a newsroom for four years), licensing has been universally seen as a Bad Idea. The reason being that this gives the licensing authority power to decide who deserves to be recognized as a credible journalist, which is one very small step away from power over deciding right/wrong-think, which is antithetical to the point of journalism. Perhaps a compromise is to identify a journalist by the news network they're associated with.
  - a3camero 6y ago
    The Supreme Court of Canada in 2009 specifically recognized a defence related to defamation as being one that's broader than "journalists" in the sense of employed people who work for the news media, and here's their explanation: "In arguments before us, the defence was referred to as the responsible journalism test. This has the value of capturing the essence of the defence in succinct style. However, the traditional media are rapidly being complemented by new ways of communicating on matters of public interest, many of them online, which do not involve journalists. These new disseminators of news and information should, absent good reasons for exclusion, be subject to the same laws as established media outlets. I agree with Lord Hoffmann that the new defence is “available to anyone who publishes material of public interest in any medium”" Decision: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7837/index.do https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7837/index... This explanation is an answer to the question of who's a "legitimate journalist", which is that it should be about what people are doing not who they work for. That's an idea captured in the above case, which reviews some of the laws of other countries on this subject too. It was in the context of defamation, but it's closely linked to your comments about accountability (since the everyday threat is lawsuits, not assault/arrest).
rhacker 6y ago
In some protests, when things get violent, is it easy to spot a journalist or do they just look like other protestors? honest question.
- warent 6y ago
  Usually they're pretty easy to spot by the microphone they carry, the docile behavior, sometimes an official nametag/badge/card, and the loudly announced "I'm a journalist" But the police have even been arresting people who show all those signs
- jakelazaroff 6y ago
  Many are clearly journalists, e.g. Omar Jimenez, the CNN reporter who was arrested on live TV along with his camera crew: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftLzQefpBvM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftLzQefpBvM
- ausbah 6y ago
  journalists and other reporting figures usually have a lanyard saying "Press" I believe? totally anecdotal, but I've seen more than few instances of police brutalizing press members like other protesters unfortunately. I think such press members are easily identifiable, the police just don't care
  - dmurray 6y ago
    > totally anecdotal, but I've seen more than few instances of police brutalizing press members like other protesters unfortunately. This is one of those situations where the opposite would be even worse: if the police were roughing up protesters just for being in the wrong place, but leaving journalists alone to keep them onside...
- Zak 6y ago
  It is conventional in non-oppressive societies for police to only arrest the people who are actually being violent or destroying property. Police arresting people at protests who aren't being violent, including journalists, merely for being in proximity to those who are violent or for sharing similar political objectives is a warning sign that a society is becoming oppressive.
indigochill 6y ago
One line from the report jumped out at me as I was skimming it: > About half the journalists here are freelancers, who may lack the institutional support of a newsroom and the financial resources for a potentially expensive legal defense. I hadn't really thought of the value of legal defense from journalism institutions (as opposed to non-institutional platforms like Substack) before.
- i_haz_rabies 6y ago
  We will look back on the ruination of journalism as a profession as one of the most consequential changes of these last two decades.
  - Loughla 6y ago
    I mean, it's a double-edged sword. On one side, the death of traditional journalism really has opened up folks' eyes to bias in reporting. Having one or two main-stream news sources really opens up the possibility for bias becoming truth. On the other side, now that everyone is a reporter, people roll around inside whichever cocoon of bias makes them feel the best. It's very frustrating, and overwhelming.
    - hilbertseries 6y ago
      > On one side, the death of traditional journalism really has opened up folks' eyes to bias in reporting. Having one or two main-stream news sources really opens up the possibility for bias becoming truth. This is not what I see happening. Instead what happens is people see news they disagree with and deem it biased. So they find a news outlet that they agree with and decide that’s the real news.
      - dgritsko 6y ago
        So here's the dilemma I'm faced with. As someone who wishes to consume news that is as factual as reasonably possible, while also being aware that at least some bias is inevitable (no matter how well-intentioned the author may be)... how does one evaluate a news source for its trustworthiness, short of physically observing an event for yourself?
ausbah 6y ago
a free, professional, and trustworthy press is vital for any functioning democracy. through all the rightful and wrongful critiques people have given the press over the past 5 years, I wish more people would understand this I unfortunately think that the US is trending towards the likes of countries like Hungary, Turkey, and Russia and how they handle their press
- umvi 6y ago
  > I unfortunately think that the US is trending towards the likes of countries like Hungary, Turkey, and Russia and how they handle their press We just had 4 years of every major media outlet (besides Fox) raking the president of the country over the coals 24/7... I think we still have a long way to go before we are like Turkey or Russia (how often do you see criticism of Putin or Erdogan in their respective media?).
  - ultrarunner 6y ago
    I could be wrong, but the wrinkle I see is that their raking him over the coals is perceived to be in pursuit of their own political goals, not in pursuit of the truth. Their criticisms were trivial (as an extreme example, Melania's performance redesigning the rose garden). Arguably, stories of substance such as police violence were actively suppressed by the state through intimidation. I largely agree, but this isn't a mono-dimensional topic. The press could remain free in trivial matters while becoming more controlled in matters relevant to governmental accountability.
    - jimmar 6y ago
      > "stories of substance such as police violence were actively suppressed by the state through intimidation." Maybe we're thinking of different events, but there was a tremendous amount of news coverage about police violence this past year.
      - ultrarunner 6y ago
        Yes, despite how the police treated journalists. I am not a journalist, so I do not know how they respond to this pressure first-hand. I suspect, though, that there is a silencing effect when it's easier, safer, and less costly to report on celebrity gossip and easily-obtainable police reports than things the police prefer they don't report on. My point is, I suppose, that the media can appear fully engaged and "busy" without generating any of the "fourth estate" corrective pressure that is so vital for a healthy society. We may never know what was not reported on.
BLO716 6y ago
I'll dare to ask this, but what defines a "journalist" in the data points here? The Clark Kent types are the only ones I really understand that can live under that title - but with the advent of syndication and micro-journalism (to use a term I just made up) for regional markets that have no real local presence of classic journalism, interested to know what it means now. Here in Buffalo, could go many directions.
- tppiotrowski 6y ago
  “While we recognize the importance and the rights of the private citizen who snaps a photo or video of an arrest, this site will only cover individuals who self-identify as journalists and have some track record of journalistic work.“ Looks like you’d have to produce some journalistic work in the past. Unclear if that’s a blog or having your worked printed in a major publication.
  - nickff 6y ago
    It's a completely circular definition (as far as I can see).
    - Throwaway1771 6y ago
      Defining now from In the past? Don't think that's necessarily circular.
    - phalangion 6y ago
      I think it's more of a "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck." If you call yourself a journalist and have a record of reporting on things, then by this definition you are one. But you can't decide you are a persecuted journalist because you got arrested.
      - nickff 6y ago
        Sure, but at some point you have to define how a duck walks and how it quacks!
tppiotrowski 6y ago
Honest question: why were these journalists arrested? Do you actually have to commit a crime or can you be arrested as part of crowd control technique and released later? Did these journalists actually commit a crime? Will they be charged with something in court?
- Miner49er 6y ago
  The police were attempting to intimidate and silence them is the honest answer. I'm not sure if any were charged with anything that stuck, because likely none of them committed any actual crimes. It's just police abusing their power.
  - screamingninja 6y ago
    > The police were attempting to intimidate and silence them is the honest answer. > likely none of them committed any actual crimes What makes you say that?
    - adamsea 6y ago
      Reading history is the honest answer. You read enough good books and articles about current events and history and then are able to make reasonable inferences. Suppressing, or evening worse distorting historical knowledge is always a tool of authoritarians and oppressors. Which is imho part of why so many folks here in the U.S. are so historically illiterate :/ :(.
    - Miner49er 6y ago
      I've done some googling, and can't find any instances were a journalist was actually convicted. All I can find is instances that they weren't charged or charges were dropped.
      - justaman 6y ago
        Several of these cases involved a blogger(or other small syndication) confronting police who were responding to an incident. You don't have to look far to see these encounters on youtube. I'm not justifying the police in these situations, however the "journalists" were doing much more than observing; bordering on obstruction.
deadmik3 6y ago
Rookie numbers
mdhh 6y ago
The Human Rights Measurement Initiative's data showed that even in 2019 the "The US scores for Safety from the State are disturbingly poor". https://humanrightsmeasurement.org/the-us-scores-poorly-in-hrmis-latest-human-rights-data/ https://humanrightsmeasurement.org/the-us-scores-poorly-in-h...
- HarryHirsch 6y ago
  Funny fact: this organization is from New Zealand and amongst other issues, discusses the "right to work" in the US. Turns out that "right to work" means something different in NZ than it does in the US. In NZ it means "can actually make an honest living".
  - pixl97 6y ago
    In the US you can generally determine what a law really stands for by putting 'anti-' in front of it.
    - sli 6y ago
      "Right to work" laws are about unions. Perhaps you're thinking of at-will employment.
- woeirua 6y ago
  Not sure I'd be citing that group. Their methodology is suprisingly opaque.
misiti3780 6y ago
This is egregious, but nothing new. Obama was not a friend to journalist either: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversation/sd-before-trump-obama-prosecuted-leaks-20170804-htmlstory.html https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversatio...
- ojnabieoot 6y ago
  This sort of unthinking, reflexive cynical glibness encourages the public indifference that allows things like this to happen: > The numbers are staggering. Arrests of journalists skyrocketed by more than 1200% in comparison to 2019. This is in fact new.
  - moojd 6y ago
    Even as someone who is generally sympathetic to reports like this I don't think 2019 is a useful comparison. What are the numbers compared to other years with mass protests and/or riots (ex. 2016)? Is this a number that scales with the number and size of large events or was 2020 truly an outlier regardless?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
bpodgursky 6y ago
The blurred lines between vlogger / live-tweeter and protest participant are responsible for a lot of this. Police have arrested journalists and camera crews before... but they generally avoid this because of the terrible optics, and there's a pretty firm line between "observing the protest" and "egging on the protest". But if an independent journalist now doesn't need a team, just a cell phone and a twitter account, I think it's very easy for (1) far, far more people to self-identify as journalists, and (2) the police to not believe or care about the distinction between casual tweeter and casual journalist.
hikerclimber 6y ago
nice hopefully they die in jail.
6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
I see some folks (and many journalists) astounded that folks wearing press badges and press helmets were arrested, which I believe to be a dangerous viewpoint. We don't want journalists to get special treatment for the same reason that we don't want politicians or judges to get special treatment and also for the same reason we dogfood our systems. Journalists need to have a representative experience in order to be able to report well. If the populace loses some right, it's not enough to just restore it for just a select few.
- chrisrhoden 6y ago
  First, the press credentials should probably grant some benefit of the doubt if the justification for arrests is something along the lines of, "I can't think of any reason you might be here except to cause mischief." I think what's shocking to people is that, traditionally, police have understood that they're somewhat more likely to be held accountable for abuses of power toward journalists. It seems likely that is primarily for the same reason that e.g. a tech company with a bad policy is more incentivized to fix it if it happens to stub the toe of anyone with an audience. That police in many cases apparently knew that there would be no consequences if the press was _strongly_ encouraged to document frequent abuses is not a great sign. The other parallel I think folks are drawing is that abuses of journalists in particular is a common feature of dictatorships. My sense is that this is not a particularly good parallel to draw in this case, but it's easy to see how one might connect the dots based on a passing review of the facts.
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
    > ... traditionally, police have understood that they're somewhat more likely to be held accountable for abuses of power toward journalists. It seems likely that is primarily for the same reason that e.g. a tech company with a bad policy is more incentivized to fix it if it happens to stub the toe of anyone with an audience. That's exactly what I see as problematic with it. When the only way to get google to fix something is by having an audience, that's really bad. When the only way to get society to fix something is by having an audience, that's really bad too. There's an analogy to product reviewers. If the chef gives something different to the reviewer than they give to everyone else, the review isn't useful or is even misleading. When something happens to reviewers or journalists, it makes front page headlines. Until then, it just happens more quietly, which is dangerous. I'm just tired of the media not making a stink about important things until it happens to them, then suddenly this things is Import and and it Must Change Now. > The other parallel I think folks are drawing is that abuses of journalists in particular is a common feature of dictatorships. Totally agreed. I don't think we should withdraw protections from journalists. We need everyone to get the protection to see what's happening with their own eyes, talk about it, and post about it.
tick_tock_tick 6y ago
Since more people are LARPing as journalists than ever before this doesn't surprise me.
slothtrop 6y ago
Someone better tell Glenn Greenwald, I don't think he got the memo.
dukeofdoom 6y ago
Its clearly a product of the riots this year. If you watch any of the live streams on youtube from the protests, its the most retarded thing ever. Literal convicts, just let out of jail, at the forefront of a civil rights movement, screaming how Black Lives matter, and how they are privileged white males. Tell me some of them were not being paid to be there. Because generally convicts are the least empathetic people. And some of the "Journalist" running around with iphones livestreaming. Its not really an organic thing. Where they just happen to be there, to record something. Often, that some act is done, just for them so they can record it and livestream it. I even watched one of these livestreamers, help direct a guy away from the police after he shot someone. I only bring this up because its not so clear cut, where the "journalists" are the good guys. When any guy with an iphone can call himself a journalist. You get all kinds of people.
- bluntfang 6y ago
  >You get all kinds of people. Very fine people on both sides
- AlotOfReading 6y ago
  Does it matter that some protestors were former convicts or that there were many citizen journalists involved? Journalists aren't always neat and professional with full crews carrying expensive equipment. There's always been a large contingent of unaffiliated people with cameras hoping to sell footage to media orgs, ever since photojournalists became a thing.
- adamsea 6y ago
  > Literal convicts, just let out of jail, at the for front of a civil rights movement, screaming how Black Lives matter, and how they are privileged white males. The privileged white male convicts are running around screaming’Black lives matter.’ Got it :):):). Lol but seriously yes I would say it makes a lot of sense for anyone to scream that Black lives matter. That’s why we all were marching earlier and have signs up and stuff. Because Black lives do matter, and all too often Black people in America are treated as if their lives are worth less because of their skin tone. And you or anybody else who disagrees, has a problem with that, or wishes to believe that that’s not the truth, well, I feel no need to equivocate or reach for mutual understanding on this particular issue. All of you folks who aren’t on board at this point can fuck off. I know that many of you, years later, with the benefits of time, wisdom, and maturity, will look back with greater understanding than you have today. So for those of you with open souls please do reach out for good resources to better educate yourselves. But yeah the white supremacist fellow-travelers (sadly an accurate description) can fuck off.
cronix 6y ago
All you need to do is write "press" in sharpie somewhere visible on your person and upload cell phone videos to youtube, twitch, dlive, etc. to be considered a "journalist" in 2020. Maybe set up a venmo/cashapp account. That's what the vast majority of live streamers in Portland do covering the riots, and most who were arrested were breaking the law. There are many more "livestreamers" than accredited journalists who work for actual newspapers, magazines and tv news stations. It would be interesting to know how many people working for actual "major publications" were arrested vs self proclaimed "journalists" streaming or uploading to youtube. I witnessed many, many livestreamers being arrested over the last 7 months of ongoing riots/unlawful assemblies. I don't think I ever saw anybody from the local news stations/news papers being arrested. The livestreamers who were arrested were violating the law. 1) participating in de-arresting someone (when the police are physically detaining someone, others will physically attack the police to set the person being arrested "free") 2) throwing objects at police 3) Not leaving the scene of a declared riot/unlawful assembly when lawfully told to do so. They are usually warned multiple times through the LRAD system with at least 15-30 minutes forewarning. Most arrested were actually actively participating in the riots and not just passively recording/reporting. They also routinely purposefully turn their cameras away when people who they are favorable towards are committing crimes so there is no evidence and chant "what did you see? We didn't see shit" over and over. Journalist Andy Ngo (https://twitter.com/mrandyngo https://twitter.com/mrandyngo) routinely posts their arrest records and what the arrest charges were, and often video of what they did when arrested. Most charges are dropped by the local DA. Most are also immediately bailed out if actually charged using a $1.4M bail fund (https://www.gofundme.com/f/pdx-protest-bail-fund https://www.gofundme.com/f/pdx-protest-bail-fund and that's only 1 fund of several) set up by the National Lawyers Guild. Basically they'll only actually charge you if you committed arson. They even drop charges of physically attacking police officers unless it's particularly egregious and well documented. As you can probably tell, I strongly disagree on who they are claiming are journalists. I don't think anyone from KOIN/KGW/Fox/The Oregonian/New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Time or any other major publications were arrested in Portland during the riots. They tend to be lawful while gathering their source material.
- user764743 6y ago
  "Journalist Andy Ngo" That's a good one, you mean the man who constantly steals the work of other journalists and pass it off as his own? The same 'journalist' who passed on kill lists of protesters' names to neo-nazi groups [0]? You need better sources. [0] https://emilygorcenski.com/post/andy-ngo-and-the-atomwaffen-kill-list/ https://emilygorcenski.com/post/andy-ngo-and-the-atomwaffen-...
skrtskrt 6y ago
Nothing like one of these threads to remind us that "Hacker" News is full authoritarian and fascist sympathizers.
- Google234 6y ago
  It’s also good to see how the far left thinks every one that isn’t 100% with them is a fascist.
  - skrtskrt 6y ago
    It's not that everyone who's not far left is fascist, it's that being a mealy-mouthed "both sides have a point" "well how were they supposed to know they were journalists" centrist when one side is getting more and more brazen about squashing basic freedoms is just legitimizing the fascists. This has turned the "center" into a compromise between having rights and not having them rather than a compromise between best ways to administer government while respecting an agreed-upon set of rights. You can be a centrist somewhere between left and right and still come down on the side of rights & freedoms every time.
vletal 6y ago
Interesting. Why is Committee to Protect Journalists not showing that in their dataset? They seem to include USA in the Country dropdown list. Is it because they were arrested and not imprisoned? https://cpj.org/data/imprisoned/2020/?status=Imprisoned&start_year=2020&end_year=2020&group_by=location https://cpj.org/data/imprisoned/2020/?status=Imprisoned&star...
- woeirua 6y ago
  This should be the top response to this post.
trident5000 6y ago
Anyone with an iphone and a youtube account is now a “journalist” and frankly theyre not far off in credibility from corporate. Thats where the bar is at. So the datapoints have shifted
- three_seagrass 6y ago
  FTA: “While we recognize the importance and the rights of the private citizen who snaps a photo or video of an arrest, this site will only cover individuals who self-identify as journalists and have some track record of journalistic work.“
- bostonvaulter2 6y ago
  That's not the definition being used here: > “While we recognize the importance and the rights of the private citizen who snaps a photo or video of an arrest, this site will only cover individuals who self-identify as journalists and have some track record of journalistic work.“
  - tick_tock_tick 6y ago
    So people that have been uploading to youtube for multiple days?
twirlock 6y ago
Actual journalists or hipsters running around in gladiator outfits to support arson?
cpr 6y ago
The "record number" seems to be (as the article says) mostly related to the rioting--reporters getting arrested as part of the rioting response. Doesn't seem like an institutional crisis at all.
- oblio 6y ago
  Wasn't there a video of clearly identified Australian press in Washington DC getting assaulted by the police? If that's normal...
  - maxk42 6y ago
    If you disobey lawful orders from police this is exactly what will happen to you. I don't understand why so many people are surprised by this.
    - seph-reed 6y ago
      > Assault https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_force_continuum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_force_continuum It's not that people are surprised. Is that they're starting to say "this isn't okay." Having accepted abuse in the past does not mean it's some big crazy idea when people start to stop accepting it.
- worker767424 6y ago
  Pointing out the obvious, if you have more violent protests and riots getting news coverage, of course there will be more journalists arrested just because there are more journalists in the middle of situations where they might be arrested.
CivBase 6y ago
How does the number of journalists compare to previous years? How does this compare with other years that featured similar amounts of public protesting and social unrest? How long were journalists kept in custody? The number of arrests is certainly concerning, but I think there is a lot to consider with 2020 and that statistic alone isn't enough for me to conclude we are sliding into an authoritarian police state. It's definitely something that should be investigated further, though.
boopmaster 6y ago
This is because Black Lives Matter™, and because black lives matter. This isn’t a hyper escalation against freedom of the press, per se, it’s an escalation of police on citizen violence that came about when police felt threatened when folks got a little extra vocal about how the racist cops boys club has little to no accountability when harming citizens they’re supposed to protect. I think this narrowly focuses on transgressions against journos. What the YoY stonks increase on Americans shot by rubber bullets?
- underseacables 6y ago
  When a journalist steps beyond being a journalist and turns into an activist, of course they’re going to get arrested if they break the law. Just because someone is a journalist does not give them a pass from breaking the law.
  - SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
    > Just because someone is a journalist does not give them a pass from breaking the law. I’m entirely on the side of real journalism so it was interacting to see some people that thought a press badge meant they didn’t need to also follow police orders.
    - pas 6y ago
      Not following police order is grounds for arrest, not for getting a riot shield bashed into one's face.
      - smnrchrds 6y ago
        I don't know about the US, but here in Canada not following police orders is not by itself grounds for arrest. It has to be a lawful order, not whatever the police fancies at the moment. The police cannot for example say "stop filming or I will arrest you" and be able to legally justify that arrest in the court of law. https://globalnews.ca/news/6233399/supreme-court-montreal-escalator-handrail-ruling/ https://globalnews.ca/news/6233399/supreme-court-montreal-es...
user764743 6y ago
Reading the comments in this thread and I am amazed at the sudden pro-authoritarian shift seen on HN lately, what's going on?
- Miner49er 6y ago
  The whole internet has slowly been shifting that way it seems. During the Anonymous era and Snowden leak era HN and the internet seemed much more anti-authoritarian.
- pas 6y ago
  The sudden outpour of the wisdom of ~30 day old accounts.
- wnevets 6y ago
  tech people aren't immune to the hyper divisiveness taking place around the world. Once "your team" decides it no longer wants to respect freedom of the press or election results then you must follow suit. Gotta make sure your team wins, right?
  - austincheney 6y ago
    Some people don’t play on a team.
    - centimeter 6y ago
      Then you're probably following a losing strategy. "Team" doesn't have to mean "generic normie political party"; there are other team dynamics at play. In any case, if you haven't partitioned the political space into allies and enemies along at least a few planes, you're probably going to get taken advantage of (at the very least).
      - austincheney 6y ago
        I am fine with being an individual with original opinions but I can empathize with insecure people who band together for reassurance.
greatwhitenorth 6y ago
The cops should just call themselves Journalists. After that, they too can do whatever they want and cry violence, fascism whenever anyone attacks them in any form.
branon 6y ago
I'm skeptical about this. Are we talking actual journalists, or "journalists" like people carrying smartphone cameras on the street during a riot?
thrower123 6y ago
How many of these are antifa dweebs that are complicit in misdemeanors and felonies?
pseingatl 6y ago
A record number of US journalists fail to support Assange or call for his release. The Bonhoffer quote is appropriate.
duxup 6y ago
>The vast majority of these arrests occurred while journalists were documenting the historic, nationwide protests So I'm guessing that most of these are various civil unrest (curfew violations, trespassing, etc) type arrests? I would assume these are situations where they're minor charges / charges dropped type of situations? Not to justify whatever given arrest(s) happened, but that seems different than say an arrest intended to prevent a story being told, shutdown a newspaper, or etc.
tomcam 6y ago
If you’ve been to some of these events, you’ll notice a large number of antifa people with handmade press passes calling themselves journalists, but also protesting peacefully by throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails at cops, Burning buildings, preventing others from using their own cameras, hitting people, and breaking things. Those people are included in this count.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- stronglikedan 6y ago
  The sad part is that many people won't believe you, even though it's true, because it was intentionally excluded from the reporting of the major news outlets.
- Gracana 6y ago
  > Those people are included in this count. They are not. You may have missed it when you read the report (it's near the end), but it says "A journalist who attends a demonstration in order to protest publicly, rather than to document the event, and is arrested in that capacity, will not be counted on the site."
drocer88 6y ago
Are there more "journalists" ? I.e., people who post on the internet or have blogs?
secfirstmd 6y ago
Some useful tools for journalists at risk to help manage their digital and physical security: Surveillance Self Defence (mostly digital security, strong US material in particular) https://ssd.eff.org/en https://ssd.eff.org/en Security in a Box (mostly digital security) https://securityinabox.org/en/ https://securityinabox.org/en/ Umbrella App (built by my team) on iOS, Android (a mix of everything from digital to physical surveillance, protest, kidnap etc.) https://secfirst.org/umbrella/ https://secfirst.org/umbrella/ or web (Beta) https://umbrella.secfirst.org https://umbrella.secfirst.org
rednerrus 6y ago
If this is just by volume, the number of arrests in PDX has to be astronomical. These kids were getting arrested every night. Mike Schmidt is running a real tag and release operation.
hardsoftnfloppy 6y ago
Oh... so journalists not complying with police orders in hostile/riot environments... literally nothing to see here...
znpy 6y ago
As a non-us citizen I don't regard the US as a free country anymore. Mind you, Bill Clinton was impeached due to the Lewinsky scandal not much for the scandal itself but because he lied about having an affair with Monica Lewinsky, and it was considered inacceptable for the president of the US to be lying. Now you've got Orange Donald lying all the time and nobody's complaining that much, and journalists are getting arrested almost literally more than ever and nobody's batting an eye. Ridiculous. How the mighty have fallen.
- devmunchies 6y ago
  IMO when the forming of militias became "extreme" (even though it's in the constitution) is when the writing was on the wall. You can't maintain freedom from the govt without keeping it in check. The public grew an aversion to militia's and we've been boiling the frog with more laws since.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > IMO when the forming of militias became "extreme" (even though it's in the constitution) is when the writing was on the wall. “Militias” are not in the Constitution. The militia, collective and unitary, and belonging to the nation as a whole (with regard to which there are both federal and state powers and responsibilities specified), is in the main body of the Constitution, and reference to a, singular, militia as being necessary to (implicitly, each) State is made in the Second Amendment. There is nothing at all in the Constitution about the formation of, or anything else concerning, private militias.
    - devmunchies 6y ago
      "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Seems weird to have militia in the same sentence as the right to bear arms. Doesn't sound like its referencing the govt.
  - znpy 6y ago
    > militias Oh shut up... The US Police is among the most militarized city-wide armed forces, you want to compare that with a mostly-unorganized group of random people protesting? Policemen and policewomen with bulletproof vests and automatic rifles on one side, people throwing rocks on the other side. Don't be silly.
simonblack 6y ago
Tough titties. When the "real" journalists won't stand up for "non-real" journalists like Assange, they have to expect the same treatment will be meted out to them also.
- znpy 6y ago
  That's also true, sadly, but: if they all get the Assange treatment tough, who's gonna remain writing articles? The regime-backed, state-obeying writers.
cambalache 6y ago
A couple of comments, it's pretty funny to say this site tends conservative when all the heavy downvoted comments are all conservatives. HN and /. "used" to be, not right wing, but libertarian, but since the escalation of the woke brigade most people have been silenced, it is not useful to lose your job over some comments. Btw, weird that the crazy story about the new McCarthy-style list of the NVIDIA researcher has not reached the site (or I havent seen it more probably). The other thing to have in mind is that this exaggerated dynamic not only happens in the US. So everytime you read something like "500!!!! journalists detained" in China/Mexico/Uzbekistan, 10% are actual journalists, and 90% are people who was in the protests filming claiming they were filming with their phones. Far from me to defend an authoritarian regime, I mention this because it seems is a blind-spot many Americans have. The same exaggerations made by the media in America (the result of a polarized society) usually happen elsewhere too
anonunivgrad 6y ago
A protester holds a camera and he becomes a “journalist”. He gets arrested for smashing windows, and he’s “an arrested journalist”.
TheMightyLlama 6y ago
This seems like the exact use case for an ILO. An Initial Legal Offering I was reading about that will now be easier for defendants to access. The linked service allows you to use the blockchain to stake your currency against the legal proceeding benefitting in the outcome if successful. https://www.institutionalassetmanager.co.uk/2020/12/15/293542/initial-litigation-offerings-bring-usd10bn-asset-class-avalanche-blockchain https://www.institutionalassetmanager.co.uk/2020/12/15/29354...

503 points by infodocket 6y ago

umvi 6y ago

> The vast majority of these arrests occurred while journalists were documenting the historic, nationwide protests over the police killing of George Floyd and in support of Black Lives Matter. So basically, it's not a coincidence - police are more likely to arrest journalists that are attending anti-police protests. And it's sort of understandable. Imagine you are a police officer called to go to a protest where everyone there hates your guts, calls for you to lose your job, and bad actors instigate confrontation, throw stuff at you, etc. The escalated tensions probably adds way more stress to the officers there and they snap and start doing heavy handed policing because they want the protest to be over so they can go home.

Grimm1 6y ago
They don't get to snap.
- arabelladonna 6y ago
  This. The last thing that anyone should want to hear is that the police are snapping under high-pressure situations, which are the situations where the average citizen is going to need them the most level-headed.
makeworld 6y ago
Was anyone suggesting it was a coincidence? It makes sense more journalists were arrested, but it's still notable.
- conductr 6y ago
  It’s also not like they have press cards in their hat or some press pass lanyard. They look like everyone else and are probably recording/photographing like everyone else. An arrest by itself doesn’t mean much in this context. But I assume they are released once they can be proven to be a journalist and no charges are brought.
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    That's not a particularly moving defense. There are no de jure rights afforded specifically to journalists (whatever your definition). And even if there were, the threat of arrest is still an intimidation tactic the police can use to subjugate civilians — journalist or not.
    - conductr 6y ago
      If you want to ignore the context I mentioned and make this a broad statement about policing in the US that’s fine but it’s also a completely different topic. Generally speaking, journalists are allowed to do their jobs and have a low risk of being arrested. They got caught up in the mix of the riots not dispersing as ordered, is my take. It’s not a trend or a bigger statement about the nations criminal justice system, no matter how flawed. This data shows nothing when context is applied.
- umvi 6y ago
  Well I went into the article (based on the title) thinking police all over the nation were randomly deciding to arrest journalists more often. But this makes it clear that no, it's only journalists at anti-police protests getting arrested at elevated rates. This article could very well have been titled "Record Breaking Number of Anti-Police Protests in U.S. This Year"
advisedwang 6y ago
It is understandable that the police want to arrest the press when the press is reporting on a movement against police brutality. Its still bad.
ausbah 6y ago
police don't nor should get to brutalize civilians just because they don't like being called out for the corruption and abuse of power rampant in their profession
- umvi 6y ago
  I'm not saying it's right, just that it's understandable. To use a software analogy it would be like if for your job you were forced to help make a website for anti-software developers who hate you and your profession, and you are treated poorly while trying to do your job. That environment is not going to cultivate craftsmanship to say the least. The right thing to do is to dutifully and professionally execute your tasks, but in reality people have emotions and some software engineers in that position might sabotage the project out of spite.
  - zug_zug 6y ago
    Well "understandable" sounds dangerously close to acceptable. Because it's foreseeable departments need to be extra judicious in which officers they send into emotionally charged situations, officers lacking self-control are going to do the country more harm than good in protest situations.
    - umvi 6y ago
      Indeed. I think it's important to humanize the police officers and acknowledge that they are people with emotions too though. Protestors can get angry and smash/burn stuff, police can get angry and arrest people and disperse crowds. People are people, and this situation is particularly tricky because the opposing parties do not like each other. In an ideal world only the cream of the crop would be sent to police these protests, but I would wager most police departments are understaffed and have to make do.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
postalrat 6y ago
Maybe I'm wrong but it seemed like anyone could go in there with a camera and "journalist" written onto their shirt and behave like they don't need to follow orders from the police.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  Why are the Police giving anyone orders unless they're committing a crime?
  - postalrat 6y ago
    Who said they weren't commit a crime? Many, if not most, were.
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      When they complain about journalists being arrested... I'm guessing they are implicitly limiting that to non-criminal journalists.
  - 8note 6y ago
    Police don't need to know of you're committing a crime, only think that you might be. It's up to the courts whether you did If a cop thinks it's illegal to have your shoes untied, or to be jogging, they can arrest you
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      That's a circular argument. Why are the police giving orders to people at all? If they think they're committing a crime, arrest them. Otherwise, leave them alone.
tjr225 6y ago
> The escalated tensions probably adds way more stress to the officers there and they snap and start doing heavy handed policing because they want the protest to be over so they can go home. If they can’t manage the stress in a way that doesn’t prevent them from doing their job correctly they should be fired. The same logic applies to you or I, what is so special about the police?
- 8note 6y ago
  They have a strong union.
rsynnott 6y ago
In that case, they should perhaps consider taking a job more commensurate with their abilities. Policing is difficult. That's not an excuse for doing it badly. Anyone who can't do it properly should be retrained, fired, or in some of the cases which occurred recently, criminally prosecuted.
- umvi 6y ago
  Unless you ramp up pay in order to get better talent, this is just a recipe to have understaffed police units.

buttholesurfer 6y ago

Well considering how many "journalists" there are/were at these BLM riots... im not surprised. Basically everyone with a cellphone and a twitch stream thinks they are a journalist. Not to mention most the said "journalists" are very biased.

NDizzle 6y ago

What's their definition of journalist here? Journalists, at these protests, that were arrested? In other words, how many twitter followers do I need before I can identify as a journalist?!

chrisseaton 6y ago
I wonder if there's any countries that specifically recognise people as journalists? Like how police officers have a warrant and specific powers and accountability, could legitimate journalists be recognised, empowered and held accountable like that? Then it could also be an offence to impersonate them. Otherwise yeah a journalist is just some random person claiming to be a journalist and I'm not sure what could be done about that?
- indigochill 6y ago
  Among the professional journalists I've known (quite a few since I went to journalism school and worked in a newsroom for four years), licensing has been universally seen as a Bad Idea. The reason being that this gives the licensing authority power to decide who deserves to be recognized as a credible journalist, which is one very small step away from power over deciding right/wrong-think, which is antithetical to the point of journalism. Perhaps a compromise is to identify a journalist by the news network they're associated with.
- a3camero 6y ago
  The Supreme Court of Canada in 2009 specifically recognized a defence related to defamation as being one that's broader than "journalists" in the sense of employed people who work for the news media, and here's their explanation: "In arguments before us, the defence was referred to as the responsible journalism test. This has the value of capturing the essence of the defence in succinct style. However, the traditional media are rapidly being complemented by new ways of communicating on matters of public interest, many of them online, which do not involve journalists. These new disseminators of news and information should, absent good reasons for exclusion, be subject to the same laws as established media outlets. I agree with Lord Hoffmann that the new defence is “available to anyone who publishes material of public interest in any medium”" Decision: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7837/index.do https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7837/index... This explanation is an answer to the question of who's a "legitimate journalist", which is that it should be about what people are doing not who they work for. That's an idea captured in the above case, which reviews some of the laws of other countries on this subject too. It was in the context of defamation, but it's closely linked to your comments about accountability (since the everyday threat is lawsuits, not assault/arrest).

rhacker 6y ago

In some protests, when things get violent, is it easy to spot a journalist or do they just look like other protestors? honest question.

warent 6y ago
Usually they're pretty easy to spot by the microphone they carry, the docile behavior, sometimes an official nametag/badge/card, and the loudly announced "I'm a journalist" But the police have even been arresting people who show all those signs
jakelazaroff 6y ago
Many are clearly journalists, e.g. Omar Jimenez, the CNN reporter who was arrested on live TV along with his camera crew: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftLzQefpBvM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftLzQefpBvM
ausbah 6y ago
journalists and other reporting figures usually have a lanyard saying "Press" I believe? totally anecdotal, but I've seen more than few instances of police brutalizing press members like other protesters unfortunately. I think such press members are easily identifiable, the police just don't care
- dmurray 6y ago
  > totally anecdotal, but I've seen more than few instances of police brutalizing press members like other protesters unfortunately. This is one of those situations where the opposite would be even worse: if the police were roughing up protesters just for being in the wrong place, but leaving journalists alone to keep them onside...
Zak 6y ago
It is conventional in non-oppressive societies for police to only arrest the people who are actually being violent or destroying property. Police arresting people at protests who aren't being violent, including journalists, merely for being in proximity to those who are violent or for sharing similar political objectives is a warning sign that a society is becoming oppressive.

indigochill 6y ago

One line from the report jumped out at me as I was skimming it: > About half the journalists here are freelancers, who may lack the institutional support of a newsroom and the financial resources for a potentially expensive legal defense. I hadn't really thought of the value of legal defense from journalism institutions (as opposed to non-institutional platforms like Substack) before.

i_haz_rabies 6y ago
We will look back on the ruination of journalism as a profession as one of the most consequential changes of these last two decades.
- Loughla 6y ago
  I mean, it's a double-edged sword. On one side, the death of traditional journalism really has opened up folks' eyes to bias in reporting. Having one or two main-stream news sources really opens up the possibility for bias becoming truth. On the other side, now that everyone is a reporter, people roll around inside whichever cocoon of bias makes them feel the best. It's very frustrating, and overwhelming.
  - hilbertseries 6y ago
    > On one side, the death of traditional journalism really has opened up folks' eyes to bias in reporting. Having one or two main-stream news sources really opens up the possibility for bias becoming truth. This is not what I see happening. Instead what happens is people see news they disagree with and deem it biased. So they find a news outlet that they agree with and decide that’s the real news.
    - dgritsko 6y ago
      So here's the dilemma I'm faced with. As someone who wishes to consume news that is as factual as reasonably possible, while also being aware that at least some bias is inevitable (no matter how well-intentioned the author may be)... how does one evaluate a news source for its trustworthiness, short of physically observing an event for yourself?

ausbah 6y ago

a free, professional, and trustworthy press is vital for any functioning democracy. through all the rightful and wrongful critiques people have given the press over the past 5 years, I wish more people would understand this I unfortunately think that the US is trending towards the likes of countries like Hungary, Turkey, and Russia and how they handle their press

umvi 6y ago
> I unfortunately think that the US is trending towards the likes of countries like Hungary, Turkey, and Russia and how they handle their press We just had 4 years of every major media outlet (besides Fox) raking the president of the country over the coals 24/7... I think we still have a long way to go before we are like Turkey or Russia (how often do you see criticism of Putin or Erdogan in their respective media?).
- ultrarunner 6y ago
  I could be wrong, but the wrinkle I see is that their raking him over the coals is perceived to be in pursuit of their own political goals, not in pursuit of the truth. Their criticisms were trivial (as an extreme example, Melania's performance redesigning the rose garden). Arguably, stories of substance such as police violence were actively suppressed by the state through intimidation. I largely agree, but this isn't a mono-dimensional topic. The press could remain free in trivial matters while becoming more controlled in matters relevant to governmental accountability.
  - jimmar 6y ago
    > "stories of substance such as police violence were actively suppressed by the state through intimidation." Maybe we're thinking of different events, but there was a tremendous amount of news coverage about police violence this past year.
    - ultrarunner 6y ago
      Yes, despite how the police treated journalists. I am not a journalist, so I do not know how they respond to this pressure first-hand. I suspect, though, that there is a silencing effect when it's easier, safer, and less costly to report on celebrity gossip and easily-obtainable police reports than things the police prefer they don't report on. My point is, I suppose, that the media can appear fully engaged and "busy" without generating any of the "fourth estate" corrective pressure that is so vital for a healthy society. We may never know what was not reported on.

BLO716 6y ago

I'll dare to ask this, but what defines a "journalist" in the data points here? The Clark Kent types are the only ones I really understand that can live under that title - but with the advent of syndication and micro-journalism (to use a term I just made up) for regional markets that have no real local presence of classic journalism, interested to know what it means now. Here in Buffalo, could go many directions.

tppiotrowski 6y ago
“While we recognize the importance and the rights of the private citizen who snaps a photo or video of an arrest, this site will only cover individuals who self-identify as journalists and have some track record of journalistic work.“ Looks like you’d have to produce some journalistic work in the past. Unclear if that’s a blog or having your worked printed in a major publication.
- nickff 6y ago
  It's a completely circular definition (as far as I can see).
  - Throwaway1771 6y ago
    Defining now from In the past? Don't think that's necessarily circular.
  - phalangion 6y ago
    I think it's more of a "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck." If you call yourself a journalist and have a record of reporting on things, then by this definition you are one. But you can't decide you are a persecuted journalist because you got arrested.
    - nickff 6y ago
      Sure, but at some point you have to define how a duck walks and how it quacks!

tppiotrowski 6y ago

Honest question: why were these journalists arrested? Do you actually have to commit a crime or can you be arrested as part of crowd control technique and released later? Did these journalists actually commit a crime? Will they be charged with something in court?

Miner49er 6y ago
The police were attempting to intimidate and silence them is the honest answer. I'm not sure if any were charged with anything that stuck, because likely none of them committed any actual crimes. It's just police abusing their power.
- screamingninja 6y ago
  > The police were attempting to intimidate and silence them is the honest answer. > likely none of them committed any actual crimes What makes you say that?
  - adamsea 6y ago
    Reading history is the honest answer. You read enough good books and articles about current events and history and then are able to make reasonable inferences. Suppressing, or evening worse distorting historical knowledge is always a tool of authoritarians and oppressors. Which is imho part of why so many folks here in the U.S. are so historically illiterate :/ :(.
  - Miner49er 6y ago
    I've done some googling, and can't find any instances were a journalist was actually convicted. All I can find is instances that they weren't charged or charges were dropped.
    - justaman 6y ago
      Several of these cases involved a blogger(or other small syndication) confronting police who were responding to an incident. You don't have to look far to see these encounters on youtube. I'm not justifying the police in these situations, however the "journalists" were doing much more than observing; bordering on obstruction.

deadmik3 6y ago

Rookie numbers

mdhh 6y ago

The Human Rights Measurement Initiative's data showed that even in 2019 the "The US scores for Safety from the State are disturbingly poor". https://humanrightsmeasurement.org/the-us-scores-poorly-in-hrmis-latest-human-rights-data/ https://humanrightsmeasurement.org/the-us-scores-poorly-in-h...

HarryHirsch 6y ago
Funny fact: this organization is from New Zealand and amongst other issues, discusses the "right to work" in the US. Turns out that "right to work" means something different in NZ than it does in the US. In NZ it means "can actually make an honest living".
- pixl97 6y ago
  In the US you can generally determine what a law really stands for by putting 'anti-' in front of it.
  - sli 6y ago
    "Right to work" laws are about unions. Perhaps you're thinking of at-will employment.
woeirua 6y ago
Not sure I'd be citing that group. Their methodology is suprisingly opaque.

misiti3780 6y ago

This is egregious, but nothing new. Obama was not a friend to journalist either: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversation/sd-before-trump-obama-prosecuted-leaks-20170804-htmlstory.html https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversatio...

ojnabieoot 6y ago
This sort of unthinking, reflexive cynical glibness encourages the public indifference that allows things like this to happen: > The numbers are staggering. Arrests of journalists skyrocketed by more than 1200% in comparison to 2019. This is in fact new.
- moojd 6y ago
  Even as someone who is generally sympathetic to reports like this I don't think 2019 is a useful comparison. What are the numbers compared to other years with mass protests and/or riots (ex. 2016)? Is this a number that scales with the number and size of large events or was 2020 truly an outlier regardless?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

bpodgursky 6y ago

The blurred lines between vlogger / live-tweeter and protest participant are responsible for a lot of this. Police have arrested journalists and camera crews before... but they generally avoid this because of the terrible optics, and there's a pretty firm line between "observing the protest" and "egging on the protest". But if an independent journalist now doesn't need a team, just a cell phone and a twitter account, I think it's very easy for (1) far, far more people to self-identify as journalists, and (2) the police to not believe or care about the distinction between casual tweeter and casual journalist.

hikerclimber 6y ago

nice hopefully they die in jail.

6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago

I see some folks (and many journalists) astounded that folks wearing press badges and press helmets were arrested, which I believe to be a dangerous viewpoint. We don't want journalists to get special treatment for the same reason that we don't want politicians or judges to get special treatment and also for the same reason we dogfood our systems. Journalists need to have a representative experience in order to be able to report well. If the populace loses some right, it's not enough to just restore it for just a select few.

chrisrhoden 6y ago
First, the press credentials should probably grant some benefit of the doubt if the justification for arrests is something along the lines of, "I can't think of any reason you might be here except to cause mischief." I think what's shocking to people is that, traditionally, police have understood that they're somewhat more likely to be held accountable for abuses of power toward journalists. It seems likely that is primarily for the same reason that e.g. a tech company with a bad policy is more incentivized to fix it if it happens to stub the toe of anyone with an audience. That police in many cases apparently knew that there would be no consequences if the press was _strongly_ encouraged to document frequent abuses is not a great sign. The other parallel I think folks are drawing is that abuses of journalists in particular is a common feature of dictatorships. My sense is that this is not a particularly good parallel to draw in this case, but it's easy to see how one might connect the dots based on a passing review of the facts.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
  > ... traditionally, police have understood that they're somewhat more likely to be held accountable for abuses of power toward journalists. It seems likely that is primarily for the same reason that e.g. a tech company with a bad policy is more incentivized to fix it if it happens to stub the toe of anyone with an audience. That's exactly what I see as problematic with it. When the only way to get google to fix something is by having an audience, that's really bad. When the only way to get society to fix something is by having an audience, that's really bad too. There's an analogy to product reviewers. If the chef gives something different to the reviewer than they give to everyone else, the review isn't useful or is even misleading. When something happens to reviewers or journalists, it makes front page headlines. Until then, it just happens more quietly, which is dangerous. I'm just tired of the media not making a stink about important things until it happens to them, then suddenly this things is Import and and it Must Change Now. > The other parallel I think folks are drawing is that abuses of journalists in particular is a common feature of dictatorships. Totally agreed. I don't think we should withdraw protections from journalists. We need everyone to get the protection to see what's happening with their own eyes, talk about it, and post about it.

tick_tock_tick 6y ago

Since more people are LARPing as journalists than ever before this doesn't surprise me.

slothtrop 6y ago

Someone better tell Glenn Greenwald, I don't think he got the memo.

dukeofdoom 6y ago

Its clearly a product of the riots this year. If you watch any of the live streams on youtube from the protests, its the most retarded thing ever. Literal convicts, just let out of jail, at the forefront of a civil rights movement, screaming how Black Lives matter, and how they are privileged white males. Tell me some of them were not being paid to be there. Because generally convicts are the least empathetic people. And some of the "Journalist" running around with iphones livestreaming. Its not really an organic thing. Where they just happen to be there, to record something. Often, that some act is done, just for them so they can record it and livestream it. I even watched one of these livestreamers, help direct a guy away from the police after he shot someone. I only bring this up because its not so clear cut, where the "journalists" are the good guys. When any guy with an iphone can call himself a journalist. You get all kinds of people.

bluntfang 6y ago
>You get all kinds of people. Very fine people on both sides
AlotOfReading 6y ago
Does it matter that some protestors were former convicts or that there were many citizen journalists involved? Journalists aren't always neat and professional with full crews carrying expensive equipment. There's always been a large contingent of unaffiliated people with cameras hoping to sell footage to media orgs, ever since photojournalists became a thing.
adamsea 6y ago
> Literal convicts, just let out of jail, at the for front of a civil rights movement, screaming how Black Lives matter, and how they are privileged white males. The privileged white male convicts are running around screaming’Black lives matter.’ Got it :):):). Lol but seriously yes I would say it makes a lot of sense for anyone to scream that Black lives matter. That’s why we all were marching earlier and have signs up and stuff. Because Black lives do matter, and all too often Black people in America are treated as if their lives are worth less because of their skin tone. And you or anybody else who disagrees, has a problem with that, or wishes to believe that that’s not the truth, well, I feel no need to equivocate or reach for mutual understanding on this particular issue. All of you folks who aren’t on board at this point can fuck off. I know that many of you, years later, with the benefits of time, wisdom, and maturity, will look back with greater understanding than you have today. So for those of you with open souls please do reach out for good resources to better educate yourselves. But yeah the white supremacist fellow-travelers (sadly an accurate description) can fuck off.

cronix 6y ago

All you need to do is write "press" in sharpie somewhere visible on your person and upload cell phone videos to youtube, twitch, dlive, etc. to be considered a "journalist" in 2020. Maybe set up a venmo/cashapp account. That's what the vast majority of live streamers in Portland do covering the riots, and most who were arrested were breaking the law. There are many more "livestreamers" than accredited journalists who work for actual newspapers, magazines and tv news stations. It would be interesting to know how many people working for actual "major publications" were arrested vs self proclaimed "journalists" streaming or uploading to youtube. I witnessed many, many livestreamers being arrested over the last 7 months of ongoing riots/unlawful assemblies. I don't think I ever saw anybody from the local news stations/news papers being arrested. The livestreamers who were arrested were violating the law. 1) participating in de-arresting someone (when the police are physically detaining someone, others will physically attack the police to set the person being arrested "free") 2) throwing objects at police 3) Not leaving the scene of a declared riot/unlawful assembly when lawfully told to do so. They are usually warned multiple times through the LRAD system with at least 15-30 minutes forewarning. Most arrested were actually actively participating in the riots and not just passively recording/reporting. They also routinely purposefully turn their cameras away when people who they are favorable towards are committing crimes so there is no evidence and chant "what did you see? We didn't see shit" over and over. Journalist Andy Ngo (https://twitter.com/mrandyngo https://twitter.com/mrandyngo) routinely posts their arrest records and what the arrest charges were, and often video of what they did when arrested. Most charges are dropped by the local DA. Most are also immediately bailed out if actually charged using a $1.4M bail fund (https://www.gofundme.com/f/pdx-protest-bail-fund https://www.gofundme.com/f/pdx-protest-bail-fund and that's only 1 fund of several) set up by the National Lawyers Guild. Basically they'll only actually charge you if you committed arson. They even drop charges of physically attacking police officers unless it's particularly egregious and well documented. As you can probably tell, I strongly disagree on who they are claiming are journalists. I don't think anyone from KOIN/KGW/Fox/The Oregonian/New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Time or any other major publications were arrested in Portland during the riots. They tend to be lawful while gathering their source material.

user764743 6y ago
"Journalist Andy Ngo" That's a good one, you mean the man who constantly steals the work of other journalists and pass it off as his own? The same 'journalist' who passed on kill lists of protesters' names to neo-nazi groups [0]? You need better sources. [0] https://emilygorcenski.com/post/andy-ngo-and-the-atomwaffen-kill-list/ https://emilygorcenski.com/post/andy-ngo-and-the-atomwaffen-...

skrtskrt 6y ago

Nothing like one of these threads to remind us that "Hacker" News is full authoritarian and fascist sympathizers.

Google234 6y ago
It’s also good to see how the far left thinks every one that isn’t 100% with them is a fascist.
- skrtskrt 6y ago
  It's not that everyone who's not far left is fascist, it's that being a mealy-mouthed "both sides have a point" "well how were they supposed to know they were journalists" centrist when one side is getting more and more brazen about squashing basic freedoms is just legitimizing the fascists. This has turned the "center" into a compromise between having rights and not having them rather than a compromise between best ways to administer government while respecting an agreed-upon set of rights. You can be a centrist somewhere between left and right and still come down on the side of rights & freedoms every time.

vletal 6y ago

Interesting. Why is Committee to Protect Journalists not showing that in their dataset? They seem to include USA in the Country dropdown list. Is it because they were arrested and not imprisoned? https://cpj.org/data/imprisoned/2020/?status=Imprisoned&start_year=2020&end_year=2020&group_by=location https://cpj.org/data/imprisoned/2020/?status=Imprisoned&star...

woeirua 6y ago
This should be the top response to this post.

trident5000 6y ago

Anyone with an iphone and a youtube account is now a “journalist” and frankly theyre not far off in credibility from corporate. Thats where the bar is at. So the datapoints have shifted

three_seagrass 6y ago
FTA: “While we recognize the importance and the rights of the private citizen who snaps a photo or video of an arrest, this site will only cover individuals who self-identify as journalists and have some track record of journalistic work.“
bostonvaulter2 6y ago
That's not the definition being used here: > “While we recognize the importance and the rights of the private citizen who snaps a photo or video of an arrest, this site will only cover individuals who self-identify as journalists and have some track record of journalistic work.“
- tick_tock_tick 6y ago
  So people that have been uploading to youtube for multiple days?

twirlock 6y ago

Actual journalists or hipsters running around in gladiator outfits to support arson?

cpr 6y ago

The "record number" seems to be (as the article says) mostly related to the rioting--reporters getting arrested as part of the rioting response. Doesn't seem like an institutional crisis at all.

oblio 6y ago
Wasn't there a video of clearly identified Australian press in Washington DC getting assaulted by the police? If that's normal...
- maxk42 6y ago
  If you disobey lawful orders from police this is exactly what will happen to you. I don't understand why so many people are surprised by this.
  - seph-reed 6y ago
    > Assault https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_force_continuum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_force_continuum It's not that people are surprised. Is that they're starting to say "this isn't okay." Having accepted abuse in the past does not mean it's some big crazy idea when people start to stop accepting it.
worker767424 6y ago
Pointing out the obvious, if you have more violent protests and riots getting news coverage, of course there will be more journalists arrested just because there are more journalists in the middle of situations where they might be arrested.

CivBase 6y ago

How does the number of journalists compare to previous years? How does this compare with other years that featured similar amounts of public protesting and social unrest? How long were journalists kept in custody? The number of arrests is certainly concerning, but I think there is a lot to consider with 2020 and that statistic alone isn't enough for me to conclude we are sliding into an authoritarian police state. It's definitely something that should be investigated further, though.

boopmaster 6y ago

This is because Black Lives Matter™, and because black lives matter. This isn’t a hyper escalation against freedom of the press, per se, it’s an escalation of police on citizen violence that came about when police felt threatened when folks got a little extra vocal about how the racist cops boys club has little to no accountability when harming citizens they’re supposed to protect. I think this narrowly focuses on transgressions against journos. What the YoY stonks increase on Americans shot by rubber bullets?

underseacables 6y ago
When a journalist steps beyond being a journalist and turns into an activist, of course they’re going to get arrested if they break the law. Just because someone is a journalist does not give them a pass from breaking the law.
- SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
  > Just because someone is a journalist does not give them a pass from breaking the law. I’m entirely on the side of real journalism so it was interacting to see some people that thought a press badge meant they didn’t need to also follow police orders.
  - pas 6y ago
    Not following police order is grounds for arrest, not for getting a riot shield bashed into one's face.
    - smnrchrds 6y ago
      I don't know about the US, but here in Canada not following police orders is not by itself grounds for arrest. It has to be a lawful order, not whatever the police fancies at the moment. The police cannot for example say "stop filming or I will arrest you" and be able to legally justify that arrest in the court of law. https://globalnews.ca/news/6233399/supreme-court-montreal-escalator-handrail-ruling/ https://globalnews.ca/news/6233399/supreme-court-montreal-es...

user764743 6y ago

Reading the comments in this thread and I am amazed at the sudden pro-authoritarian shift seen on HN lately, what's going on?

Miner49er 6y ago
The whole internet has slowly been shifting that way it seems. During the Anonymous era and Snowden leak era HN and the internet seemed much more anti-authoritarian.
pas 6y ago
The sudden outpour of the wisdom of ~30 day old accounts.
wnevets 6y ago
tech people aren't immune to the hyper divisiveness taking place around the world. Once "your team" decides it no longer wants to respect freedom of the press or election results then you must follow suit. Gotta make sure your team wins, right?
- austincheney 6y ago
  Some people don’t play on a team.
  - centimeter 6y ago
    Then you're probably following a losing strategy. "Team" doesn't have to mean "generic normie political party"; there are other team dynamics at play. In any case, if you haven't partitioned the political space into allies and enemies along at least a few planes, you're probably going to get taken advantage of (at the very least).
    - austincheney 6y ago
      I am fine with being an individual with original opinions but I can empathize with insecure people who band together for reassurance.

greatwhitenorth 6y ago

The cops should just call themselves Journalists. After that, they too can do whatever they want and cry violence, fascism whenever anyone attacks them in any form.

branon 6y ago

I'm skeptical about this. Are we talking actual journalists, or "journalists" like people carrying smartphone cameras on the street during a riot?

thrower123 6y ago

How many of these are antifa dweebs that are complicit in misdemeanors and felonies?

pseingatl 6y ago

A record number of US journalists fail to support Assange or call for his release. The Bonhoffer quote is appropriate.

duxup 6y ago

>The vast majority of these arrests occurred while journalists were documenting the historic, nationwide protests So I'm guessing that most of these are various civil unrest (curfew violations, trespassing, etc) type arrests? I would assume these are situations where they're minor charges / charges dropped type of situations? Not to justify whatever given arrest(s) happened, but that seems different than say an arrest intended to prevent a story being told, shutdown a newspaper, or etc.

tomcam 6y ago

If you’ve been to some of these events, you’ll notice a large number of antifa people with handmade press passes calling themselves journalists, but also protesting peacefully by throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails at cops, Burning buildings, preventing others from using their own cameras, hitting people, and breaking things. Those people are included in this count.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
stronglikedan 6y ago
The sad part is that many people won't believe you, even though it's true, because it was intentionally excluded from the reporting of the major news outlets.
Gracana 6y ago
> Those people are included in this count. They are not. You may have missed it when you read the report (it's near the end), but it says "A journalist who attends a demonstration in order to protest publicly, rather than to document the event, and is arrested in that capacity, will not be counted on the site."

drocer88 6y ago

Are there more "journalists" ? I.e., people who post on the internet or have blogs?

secfirstmd 6y ago

Some useful tools for journalists at risk to help manage their digital and physical security: Surveillance Self Defence (mostly digital security, strong US material in particular) https://ssd.eff.org/en https://ssd.eff.org/en Security in a Box (mostly digital security) https://securityinabox.org/en/ https://securityinabox.org/en/ Umbrella App (built by my team) on iOS, Android (a mix of everything from digital to physical surveillance, protest, kidnap etc.) https://secfirst.org/umbrella/ https://secfirst.org/umbrella/ or web (Beta) https://umbrella.secfirst.org https://umbrella.secfirst.org

rednerrus 6y ago

If this is just by volume, the number of arrests in PDX has to be astronomical. These kids were getting arrested every night. Mike Schmidt is running a real tag and release operation.

hardsoftnfloppy 6y ago

Oh... so journalists not complying with police orders in hostile/riot environments... literally nothing to see here...

znpy 6y ago

As a non-us citizen I don't regard the US as a free country anymore. Mind you, Bill Clinton was impeached due to the Lewinsky scandal not much for the scandal itself but because he lied about having an affair with Monica Lewinsky, and it was considered inacceptable for the president of the US to be lying. Now you've got Orange Donald lying all the time and nobody's complaining that much, and journalists are getting arrested almost literally more than ever and nobody's batting an eye. Ridiculous. How the mighty have fallen.

devmunchies 6y ago
IMO when the forming of militias became "extreme" (even though it's in the constitution) is when the writing was on the wall. You can't maintain freedom from the govt without keeping it in check. The public grew an aversion to militia's and we've been boiling the frog with more laws since.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > IMO when the forming of militias became "extreme" (even though it's in the constitution) is when the writing was on the wall. “Militias” are not in the Constitution. The militia, collective and unitary, and belonging to the nation as a whole (with regard to which there are both federal and state powers and responsibilities specified), is in the main body of the Constitution, and reference to a, singular, militia as being necessary to (implicitly, each) State is made in the Second Amendment. There is nothing at all in the Constitution about the formation of, or anything else concerning, private militias.
  - devmunchies 6y ago
    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Seems weird to have militia in the same sentence as the right to bear arms. Doesn't sound like its referencing the govt.
- znpy 6y ago
  > militias Oh shut up... The US Police is among the most militarized city-wide armed forces, you want to compare that with a mostly-unorganized group of random people protesting? Policemen and policewomen with bulletproof vests and automatic rifles on one side, people throwing rocks on the other side. Don't be silly.

simonblack 6y ago

Tough titties. When the "real" journalists won't stand up for "non-real" journalists like Assange, they have to expect the same treatment will be meted out to them also.

znpy 6y ago
That's also true, sadly, but: if they all get the Assange treatment tough, who's gonna remain writing articles? The regime-backed, state-obeying writers.

cambalache 6y ago

A couple of comments, it's pretty funny to say this site tends conservative when all the heavy downvoted comments are all conservatives. HN and /. "used" to be, not right wing, but libertarian, but since the escalation of the woke brigade most people have been silenced, it is not useful to lose your job over some comments. Btw, weird that the crazy story about the new McCarthy-style list of the NVIDIA researcher has not reached the site (or I havent seen it more probably). The other thing to have in mind is that this exaggerated dynamic not only happens in the US. So everytime you read something like "500!!!! journalists detained" in China/Mexico/Uzbekistan, 10% are actual journalists, and 90% are people who was in the protests filming claiming they were filming with their phones. Far from me to defend an authoritarian regime, I mention this because it seems is a blind-spot many Americans have. The same exaggerations made by the media in America (the result of a polarized society) usually happen elsewhere too

anonunivgrad 6y ago

A protester holds a camera and he becomes a “journalist”. He gets arrested for smashing windows, and he’s “an arrested journalist”.

TheMightyLlama 6y ago

This seems like the exact use case for an ILO. An Initial Legal Offering I was reading about that will now be easier for defendants to access. The linked service allows you to use the blockchain to stake your currency against the legal proceeding benefitting in the outcome if successful. https://www.institutionalassetmanager.co.uk/2020/12/15/293542/initial-litigation-offerings-bring-usd10bn-asset-class-avalanche-blockchain https://www.institutionalassetmanager.co.uk/2020/12/15/29354...