3 ms·
I see your point about going undercover. But I think the fact that they said they were with the AP modifies things slightly. If they had pretended to be a repor
by privong 12y ago
I see your point about going undercover. But I think the fact that they said they were with the AP modifies things slightly. If they had pretended to be a reporter from some made-up news agency, then sure, I could see it as "just going undercover". But they used the reputation of the AP to carry that out. It isn't quite impersonation, but it is close. And it potentially harms the credibility of the AP. So, in that sense, it is more than "just going undercover".
- iancarroll 12y agoOf course, if the news agency didn't really exist how convincing would it be?
- charonn0 12y agoConvincing enough, e.g.: > Hi! I'm Bob with KBBL Eyewitness News. Do you mind if I ask you a few questions?
- nickff 12y agoIt would be interesting to see whether the AP could sue the FBI under the 'takings' clause of the constitution, because the FBI has taken some of their reputation, and harmed the AP's ability to conduct its business.