Discussion for article #245054
This story says the photographer was working for the student newspaper. I thought he was with ESPN. In either case, assaulting him was wrong.
As I recall, she also called for help, so there is also felony conspiracy.
Bothâhe is (was?) a stringer for ESPN.
Shouldâve shot him. Then she probably wouldnât have gotten in any trouble.
PusLimbaaaaaaaahâs favorite FemiNaziâŚ
What was the reason she wanted him removed?
WHY canât this be a âlearningâ experience and a reiteration of the rights of individuals, the press, etc? Why do we always have to fire, censure, nail everyone that makes a mistake and then have 100 legislators (who should have something BETTER to do than play politics) sign on to fire her?
The protesters had just learned that the president had resigned. So they were gathering to decide what they should do next. This kid w/ a camera was demanding & pushing his way into their gathering declaring his âfreedom of speech - freedom of the press.â
She would have been wiser to be more circumspect with him. But his behavior reminded me of the Westboro Baptist Church folks or OâKeefe. Pretty good at drawing a foul!
I heard the kid talk later. In all his babble, he revealed that his main goal was to âget her firedâ and âmake her go to jailâ. I donât see alot of journalism in his behavior.
Who does she think she is, Donald Trump?
They were in a public place. She was out of control, and totally wrong in trying to exclude him from one part of the public place.
In this video Q&A w Mark Schierbeck we learn that, although he talks alot about his ârightsâ as a journalist, he had zero training in journalistic ethics. Nor any concept that other folks have rights, too.
If you get bored, go to the end when the audience is questioning him. His responses are revealing.
Can I sit on your picnic blanket? It is a public park, after all.
Then she very stupidly obliged him.
He sounds like an OâKeefesque little shitstain, but as long as he was on public property and not contravening any specific laws or regs governing the use of video equipment, he had a right to be there.
Quite a shame that the university and city police do not provide protection for the protesters and then use the justice system to further harass the protesters.
To make matters worse, the journalist was in the wrong here. Journalistâs first amendment doesnât trump protesters first amendment. You donât get to disrupt a protest in order to cover it - just like you donât get to cover a basketball game from center court.
There was no picnic blanket there. And if you believe that you can, by fiat, simply claim the entire park, your notion of appropriate behavior is clueless and incorrect.
And the perp was a âjournalismâ professorâŚthink she would have known about press freedomsâŚ
A charge of assault seems overkill, and highly political.
as long as he was on public property and not contravening any specific laws or regs governing the use of video equipment, he had a right to be there
Again, the journalistâs right to be on public property does not trump the protesterâs right to be on public property. If heâs interfering with their protest he is in the wrong. The real problem was the lack of protection provided by local authorities. Their failure (or refusal) to establish the boundaries of the protest led to this mess.
And if you believe that you can, by fiat, simply claim the entire park
Way to shift the goalposts - the entire park - puhleese.
The journalist himself admits he was trying to infiltrate the protesters area.