3 ms·

For context, more than 3,000 were arrested in LA county during the period of unrest last summer: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/03/george-floyd-pr

For context, more than 3,000 were arrested in LA county during the period of unrest last summer: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/03/george-floyd-protests-los-angeles-arrests https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/03/george-floyd... Pointing to individual instances of reporters being arrested obscures the broader picture: level of unrest unprecedented in decades promoted curfews which many disregarded and were subsequently arrested. A slim minority of those were journalists. To put this in perspective, 117 people categorize as journalists (the majority were self employed) were arrested in 2020 as per an earlier HN post [1]. Contrast this to 3,000 total arrests in LA county alone. And that figure for LA is from early June. As I pointed out, journalist arrests are disproportionately concentrated in areas that saw widespread rioting [2]. The idea that police in the US are targeting journalists is unsubstantiated. Journalists are putting themselves in positions in which any normal person would be arrested, and the police are treating them like any normal person. 1. https://freedom.press/news/2020-report-journalists-arrested-us/ https://freedom.press/news/2020-report-journalists-arrested-... 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25434409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25434409

newacct583 6y ago
> Journalists are putting themselves in positions in which any normal person would be arrested, and the police are treating them like any normal person. Which is exactly why we expect journalists to have special protection, and thus why we track violations of these norms. And things are clearly getting worse. The point isn't to find an excuse for the police here, it's to recognize that a problem exists and find a solution.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Which is exactly why we expect journalists to have special protection I don't. Freedom of the press is the freedom of anyone who has one to publish, not special freedom of media or journalists as a privileged class. In fact, I find the suggestion of such “special protection” to be aristocratic and not merely outside of but contrary to the idea of press freedom. I am concerned about activity designed to prevent people from engaging in journalistic activity or retaliating for them so doing, I am not concerned about journalists being subjected to the same treatment as everyone else unless that treatment would be unacceptable if they weren't journalists (and, in that case, the objection has little to do them being journalists, though if the wrongs are concentrated on journalists, it starts to look like deterrence or retaliation against journalistic activity.)
- manfredo 6y ago
  > Which is exactly why we expect journalists to have special protection, and thus why we track violations of these norms. And things are clearly getting worse. No, we don't. Journalists aren't some elevated caste that are privileged above normal people. And besides, most of the journalists arrested were not employed by a news organization. Anyone can call themselves a journalist. The "problem" seems to be that journalists are treated like normal people. The thing is, many do not see a problem with this.
  - newacct583 6y ago
    > Journalists aren't some elevated caste that are privileged above normal people That's simply not true, and the whole premise behind the linked article makes that clear. And the weird thing is that you'd clearly agree, IF the journalists were covering something you wanted covered. The only reason I see that you're fighting like crazy over this is that the US journalists in question were covering a protest movement you opposed.
    - manfredo 6y ago
      At this point I'm really not sure how you're coming to these conclusions. I support protests and lawful demonstrations. People and journalists aren't being arrested for that. This was stated in the comment I linked, so I'm not sure how you reached the conclusion that I oppose these protests. What I do oppose are people violating curfews or orders to disperse and falsely claiming that they were arrested for journalistic activity while omitting the fact that non-journalists in the same area were also arrested.
      - newacct583 6y ago
        > People and journalists aren't being arrested for that. I literally linked an event upthread where a journalist was arrested for exactly that. I suspect the reason you really aren't sure what I'm saying is that you aren't reading what I write.
        6y ago
meragrin_ 6y ago
Not arrested. It was arrested or detained. Detainment included being amongst a crowd being "kettled" and later released from the "kettle" once they could deal with it.

newacct583 6y ago

> Journalists are putting themselves in positions in which any normal person would be arrested, and the police are treating them like any normal person. Which is exactly why we expect journalists to have special protection, and thus why we track violations of these norms. And things are clearly getting worse. The point isn't to find an excuse for the police here, it's to recognize that a problem exists and find a solution.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> Which is exactly why we expect journalists to have special protection I don't. Freedom of the press is the freedom of anyone who has one to publish, not special freedom of media or journalists as a privileged class. In fact, I find the suggestion of such “special protection” to be aristocratic and not merely outside of but contrary to the idea of press freedom. I am concerned about activity designed to prevent people from engaging in journalistic activity or retaliating for them so doing, I am not concerned about journalists being subjected to the same treatment as everyone else unless that treatment would be unacceptable if they weren't journalists (and, in that case, the objection has little to do them being journalists, though if the wrongs are concentrated on journalists, it starts to look like deterrence or retaliation against journalistic activity.)
manfredo 6y ago
> Which is exactly why we expect journalists to have special protection, and thus why we track violations of these norms. And things are clearly getting worse. No, we don't. Journalists aren't some elevated caste that are privileged above normal people. And besides, most of the journalists arrested were not employed by a news organization. Anyone can call themselves a journalist. The "problem" seems to be that journalists are treated like normal people. The thing is, many do not see a problem with this.
- newacct583 6y ago
  > Journalists aren't some elevated caste that are privileged above normal people That's simply not true, and the whole premise behind the linked article makes that clear. And the weird thing is that you'd clearly agree, IF the journalists were covering something you wanted covered. The only reason I see that you're fighting like crazy over this is that the US journalists in question were covering a protest movement you opposed.
  - manfredo 6y ago
    At this point I'm really not sure how you're coming to these conclusions. I support protests and lawful demonstrations. People and journalists aren't being arrested for that. This was stated in the comment I linked, so I'm not sure how you reached the conclusion that I oppose these protests. What I do oppose are people violating curfews or orders to disperse and falsely claiming that they were arrested for journalistic activity while omitting the fact that non-journalists in the same area were also arrested.
    - newacct583 6y ago
      > People and journalists aren't being arrested for that. I literally linked an event upthread where a journalist was arrested for exactly that. I suspect the reason you really aren't sure what I'm saying is that you aren't reading what I write.
      - 6y ago

meragrin_ 6y ago

Not arrested. It was arrested or detained. Detainment included being amongst a crowd being "kettled" and later released from the "kettle" once they could deal with it.