blansky said:This will end up in the soapbox before very long.
firecracker said:Knowing the fact that some (or many) authorities have practiced snatching certain activists in the past using these visual evidences (not only in the U.S., but pretty much everywhere), I think there's a need to protect what we have shot with or without the aims towards our subjects.
blansky said:This will end up in the soapbox before very long.
It's very complicated, and although some will say it's just overreactions by government since 9/11 and Bush, the fact is, that journalists and law enforcement have had these types of run ins for a long time.
A couple of points:
Does having a blog, and a camera, make you a "journalist".
As a witness to a crime, do you have the right to withhold evidence.
Does a journalist have the right to withhold or protect sources when those sources are witnesses to crimes.
Are some of our freedoms more important than laws.
I think on some of these question, "journalists" really need to pick their battles, and some are not worth the fight, others definately are, and the entire media should back them up.
I'm sure this thread will evolve into a bashfest about the current state of affairs but I remind you these "questions" have been going on for a long time before the current overreactions.
Michael
noseoil said:As photographers, we are able, by law, to shoot in public places. Our film and it's content is our property. It seems to me we have an obligation to be responsible citizens, as well as responsible photographers. If any of our shots are germane in an investigation, trial or inquiry , why would we not wish to cooperate in a legal situation? tim
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?