6 ms·

“It has a ripple effect,” Mr. Maldonado, of Article 19, said. “It goes beyond just the discourse, which in itself has an inhibiting impact on the press.” Add t

by dfxm12 6y ago

“It has a ripple effect,” Mr. Maldonado, of Article 19, said. “It goes beyond just the discourse, which in itself has an inhibiting impact on the press.” Add this to the record breaking number of journalists arrested in the US this year [0], and it's plain to see that truth is at a premium. People on this site like to proselytize about freedom of speech, well this brazen attack on freedom of speech, where people are being held against their will or murdered, should weigh most heavily on our minds. 0 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25432540 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25432540

vrperson 6y ago
What makes you so sure that these people were arrested for telling the truth? What about telling the truth would be an offense worthy of arrest in the US? Assange and Manning come to mind, for leaking government secrets. But according to the article, most arrests happened in connection with Black Lives Matter protests. It seems equally plausible that more people than ever try to evade arrest by claiming they are journalists. Or journalist have less and less ethics when doing their jobs. Not saying that's the root cause, just that you can not simply assume all those people were arrested for telling "the truth". And how do people who bemoan that stand on the subject of censorship on social networks?
- klyrs 6y ago
  > What makes you so sure that these people were arrested for telling the truth? > But according to the article, most arrests happened in connection with Black Lives Matter protests. Kinda answered your own question here. Journalists were arrested for being present at newsworthy events, recording the truth as it unfolded before them
  - meragrin_ 6y ago
    Most probably weren't even arrested. Just "detained" while detaining the group of protestors they were amongst.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- BitwiseFool 6y ago
  The link included in the person you responded to says: "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." Journalist isn't a protected title. And I wonder how many activists don the "Journalist" label at protests.
  - vrperson 6y ago
    I have heard it is a common strategy among activists now, but that was a claim made by their "opponents", so not sure how prevalent it is.
- meragrin_ 6y ago
  If you go read the source for the numbers, journalists "detained" in a group of protestors being detained were included in the count. You can easily rack up large numbers that way. The journalists caught up in these were allowed to leave after they had the group under controlled.
- dfxm12 6y ago
  But according to the article, most arrests happened in connection with Black Lives Matter protests. It seems equally plausible that more people than ever try to evade arrest by claiming they are journalists. Not really. The first amendment protects freedom of the press as well as freedom of assembly. Arresting protestors has a similar chilling effect on speech.
  - vrperson 6y ago
    Pretty sure that only applies to peaceful protests.
- mhh__ 6y ago
  Almost every day during the height of the protests there were videos circulating of the police arresting people (and using violence against) people who were obviously journalists. For example, a CNN reporter was arrested mid-broadcast and there was footage of some people with cameras being attacked even though they were sat at the side of the road filming rather than taking part. "Equally plausible" is false equivalency.
meragrin_ 6y ago
The numbers are inflated by including "detained" journalists and by using a loose definition of journalist. The "detained journalists" include journalists caught in a group of protestors being "kettled" and were later released once the group of people were safely under control. It wasn't like the cops were targeting all the "detained journalists". It also seemed they included anyone calling themselves a journalist. I couldn't even find any sort of presence of some of them.
- SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
  Wasn’t there a thing where the police arrested press on national tv, with badges and everything? Didn’t a photographer for the news have their eye shot out by police? Who can trust any claims that they aren’t targeting journalists to arrest given this?
  - meragrin_ 6y ago
    Yes there was "a thing where the police arrested press on national tv". That does nothing to change the fact the "Freedom of the Press Foundation" inflates their "arrest" numbers by including journalists being caught up in "kettles" for a short time and released once they got around to checking for press. It is all in their data. They don't even try to hide it and do not see it as disingenuous to include them as arrested or detained.
  - manfredo 6y ago
    Several journalists violated dispersal orders and curfews, and were subsequently arrested and their arrests were recorded. But the police were also arresting non-journalists violating the curfews. There's zero indication that police were targeting journalists. In fact, the opposite many journalists were released hours after being arrested. Contrary to what seems to be common belief, being a journalists does not confer any special rights or exemptions
    - SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
      There is in fact indication that journalists have at least been targeted in Portland according to an ACLU case, which results in a judge putting a restraining order on the police. I’m not a law person, so if you know better on the nuances please educate me on the matter but this legal judgement implies to me that journalists do have some special status and that it is is inappropriate to target them for arrests.
marcusverus 6y ago
The report compares the number of arrests in 2020 -- a year that saw the largest number of huge protests in decades-- to the number of arrests in 2019--which contained nothing approaching the number, scale, or sheer chaos of the George Floyd protests. This might indicate that journalists are under attack. But it seems more likely that some tiny percentage of journalists at a given protest are arrested at any given protests, and that in years with more protesting, more journalists will be arrested. Crank up the number of events, and you crank up the number of arrests. In fact, their posted numbers track quite closely with this wiki data on size of protests in a given year [0][1]. 2020 - 20,000,000 protesters - 181 arrests 2019 - No protests indicated - 9 arrests 2018 - 3,500,000 protesters - 11 arrests 2017 - 6,600,000 protesters - 38 arrests The increase in 2020 is out of proportion with the other years, but then the marches in 2017 & 2018 were generic, peaceful protests, while the George Floyd protests where chaotic (as evidenced by the resulting 2 Billion in property damage)[2] [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_protests_in_the_United_States_by_size https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_protests_in_the_United... [1] [2]https://fee.org/articles/george-floyd-riots-caused-record-setting-2-billion-in-damage-new-report-says-here-s-why-the-true-cost-is-even-higher/ https://fee.org/articles/george-floyd-riots-caused-record-se...
- staplers 6y ago
  I think a more precise observation is that when law enforcement is more heavily scrutinized, they crack down harder. This isn't police "confusing" journalists and protesters like you are implying. Example: Federal Judge Restricts Portland Police Interactions With Journalists, Observers (July) https://www.opb.org/news/article/federal-judge-portland-police-journalists-protests/ https://www.opb.org/news/article/federal-judge-portland-poli... Portland journalist arrested while clearly displaying his credentials (August) https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/portland-journalist-arrested-while-clearly-wearing-his-credentials/283-881a67b5-b664-4f08-958c-05da3dafb368 https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/portland-journalist-a...
belorn 6y ago
For what I have seen, people on this site has for the last decade been rather skeptical about freedom of speech. When a journalist is being arrested the common top threads are about the validity of the evidence and if the person is guilty or not, and with a large portion of people saying that the individual should face the charges if they are innocent. I have also seen plenty of high upvoted comments that explicitly say how people who play the game in regard to politics should not be surprised if they get burned. I have been in those flame wars advocating for freedom of speech, but it usually doesn't end that well. The only thing I would expect is a universal opposition to journalists being killed.
- Chris2048 6y ago
  > with a large portion of people saying that the individual should face the charges if they are innocent Can you link to such comments?
bondarchuk 6y ago
>People on this site like to proselytize about freedom of speech Perhaps you've been away for a few months? Stopping the spread of "fake news" is all the rage now.

by dfxm12 6y ago

vrperson 6y ago

What makes you so sure that these people were arrested for telling the truth? What about telling the truth would be an offense worthy of arrest in the US? Assange and Manning come to mind, for leaking government secrets. But according to the article, most arrests happened in connection with Black Lives Matter protests. It seems equally plausible that more people than ever try to evade arrest by claiming they are journalists. Or journalist have less and less ethics when doing their jobs. Not saying that's the root cause, just that you can not simply assume all those people were arrested for telling "the truth". And how do people who bemoan that stand on the subject of censorship on social networks?

klyrs 6y ago
> What makes you so sure that these people were arrested for telling the truth? > But according to the article, most arrests happened in connection with Black Lives Matter protests. Kinda answered your own question here. Journalists were arrested for being present at newsworthy events, recording the truth as it unfolded before them
- meragrin_ 6y ago
  Most probably weren't even arrested. Just "detained" while detaining the group of protestors they were amongst.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
BitwiseFool 6y ago
The link included in the person you responded to says: "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." Journalist isn't a protected title. And I wonder how many activists don the "Journalist" label at protests.
- vrperson 6y ago
  I have heard it is a common strategy among activists now, but that was a claim made by their "opponents", so not sure how prevalent it is.
meragrin_ 6y ago
If you go read the source for the numbers, journalists "detained" in a group of protestors being detained were included in the count. You can easily rack up large numbers that way. The journalists caught up in these were allowed to leave after they had the group under controlled.
dfxm12 6y ago
But according to the article, most arrests happened in connection with Black Lives Matter protests. It seems equally plausible that more people than ever try to evade arrest by claiming they are journalists. Not really. The first amendment protects freedom of the press as well as freedom of assembly. Arresting protestors has a similar chilling effect on speech.
- vrperson 6y ago
  Pretty sure that only applies to peaceful protests.
mhh__ 6y ago
Almost every day during the height of the protests there were videos circulating of the police arresting people (and using violence against) people who were obviously journalists. For example, a CNN reporter was arrested mid-broadcast and there was footage of some people with cameras being attacked even though they were sat at the side of the road filming rather than taking part. "Equally plausible" is false equivalency.

meragrin_ 6y ago

The numbers are inflated by including "detained" journalists and by using a loose definition of journalist. The "detained journalists" include journalists caught in a group of protestors being "kettled" and were later released once the group of people were safely under control. It wasn't like the cops were targeting all the "detained journalists". It also seemed they included anyone calling themselves a journalist. I couldn't even find any sort of presence of some of them.

SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
Wasn’t there a thing where the police arrested press on national tv, with badges and everything? Didn’t a photographer for the news have their eye shot out by police? Who can trust any claims that they aren’t targeting journalists to arrest given this?
- meragrin_ 6y ago
  Yes there was "a thing where the police arrested press on national tv". That does nothing to change the fact the "Freedom of the Press Foundation" inflates their "arrest" numbers by including journalists being caught up in "kettles" for a short time and released once they got around to checking for press. It is all in their data. They don't even try to hide it and do not see it as disingenuous to include them as arrested or detained.
- manfredo 6y ago
  Several journalists violated dispersal orders and curfews, and were subsequently arrested and their arrests were recorded. But the police were also arresting non-journalists violating the curfews. There's zero indication that police were targeting journalists. In fact, the opposite many journalists were released hours after being arrested. Contrary to what seems to be common belief, being a journalists does not confer any special rights or exemptions
  - SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
    There is in fact indication that journalists have at least been targeted in Portland according to an ACLU case, which results in a judge putting a restraining order on the police. I’m not a law person, so if you know better on the nuances please educate me on the matter but this legal judgement implies to me that journalists do have some special status and that it is is inappropriate to target them for arrests.

marcusverus 6y ago

The report compares the number of arrests in 2020 -- a year that saw the largest number of huge protests in decades-- to the number of arrests in 2019--which contained nothing approaching the number, scale, or sheer chaos of the George Floyd protests. This might indicate that journalists are under attack. But it seems more likely that some tiny percentage of journalists at a given protest are arrested at any given protests, and that in years with more protesting, more journalists will be arrested. Crank up the number of events, and you crank up the number of arrests. In fact, their posted numbers track quite closely with this wiki data on size of protests in a given year [0][1]. 2020 - 20,000,000 protesters - 181 arrests 2019 - No protests indicated - 9 arrests 2018 - 3,500,000 protesters - 11 arrests 2017 - 6,600,000 protesters - 38 arrests The increase in 2020 is out of proportion with the other years, but then the marches in 2017 & 2018 were generic, peaceful protests, while the George Floyd protests where chaotic (as evidenced by the resulting 2 Billion in property damage)[2] [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_protests_in_the_United_States_by_size https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_protests_in_the_United... [1] [2]https://fee.org/articles/george-floyd-riots-caused-record-setting-2-billion-in-damage-new-report-says-here-s-why-the-true-cost-is-even-higher/ https://fee.org/articles/george-floyd-riots-caused-record-se...

staplers 6y ago
I think a more precise observation is that when law enforcement is more heavily scrutinized, they crack down harder. This isn't police "confusing" journalists and protesters like you are implying. Example: Federal Judge Restricts Portland Police Interactions With Journalists, Observers (July) https://www.opb.org/news/article/federal-judge-portland-police-journalists-protests/ https://www.opb.org/news/article/federal-judge-portland-poli... Portland journalist arrested while clearly displaying his credentials (August) https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/portland-journalist-arrested-while-clearly-wearing-his-credentials/283-881a67b5-b664-4f08-958c-05da3dafb368 https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/portland-journalist-a...

belorn 6y ago

For what I have seen, people on this site has for the last decade been rather skeptical about freedom of speech. When a journalist is being arrested the common top threads are about the validity of the evidence and if the person is guilty or not, and with a large portion of people saying that the individual should face the charges if they are innocent. I have also seen plenty of high upvoted comments that explicitly say how people who play the game in regard to politics should not be surprised if they get burned. I have been in those flame wars advocating for freedom of speech, but it usually doesn't end that well. The only thing I would expect is a universal opposition to journalists being killed.

Chris2048 6y ago
> with a large portion of people saying that the individual should face the charges if they are innocent Can you link to such comments?

bondarchuk 6y ago

>People on this site like to proselytize about freedom of speech Perhaps you've been away for a few months? Stopping the spread of "fake news" is all the rage now.