Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

reason.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 325 posts

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#171

Post by jeremyjh »

macinjosh wrote: post #127
sudonim wrote: post #58

There’s reason to be skeptical. From a local Portland journalist covering the protests: https://twitter.com/alex_zee/status/1302284883625046016?s=21 “ Not that I want to legitimize this @reason piece, but I have filmed copious moments of ppl throwing things at police/vandalizing bldgs/etc & have never been told I’m not allowed to film. I have never heard of the so-called “IPC.” The lack of sourcing in this story show…

No there isn’t. There is documented video of this happening. It may not happen to every single journalist but that doesn’t mean it is not happening. Antifa is very organized and they specifically look for journalists they do not like.

Please post a link to these videos. I was surprised I couldn't find any in OP.

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#172

Post by threatofrain »

formercoder wrote: post #40
zaroth wrote: post #19

The mainstream news reporting on Portland (and other regional rioting) got to the point where they were bald-faced lying about peaceful protests standing in front of burning buildings. The most charitable interpretation I can think of is that these professional journalists think that their readers can’t understand a nuanced world of gray and need everything reduced to black and white. There can be a concept of “BLM”…

I’ve found that most people I speak to can’t accept that most issues are complex shades of gray. It’s all our team or their team based on whatever news channel they subscribe to. No one takes time to dig below the surface and think for themselves.

If someone suggests that they think in morally gray manner, doesn't it signal to everyone around them that they're morally suspicious?

>"Do you think it's alright that police are getting killed?"

> "Well, let's think about the details, as the situation can be complex or even gray..."

You might say this is a stupid and sparse example, but well, let's think about it... for many people instinctual morality is their primary way of relating to the world. If you suggest you have an intellectual and distinctive approach to morality, what does that mean? Does that moral distinction mean moral superiority, arrogance, or moral alienation?

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#173

Post by kombucha111 »

tlear wrote: post #161
kombucha111 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the police have been making it worse. Using questionable tactics, using disproportionate force, lieing, inciting/supporting one side over the other, using beyond questionable reasoning for declaring a riot, using agent provocateur ...i could go on. Check out Blue Leaks as well. The fact is the majority of the media covering Portland are not showing the whole story.

Well cops left in Seattle and let Marxist larpers have a go. Couple dead people later that had to be ended. Well that and looting with a good doze of racketeering(protection money) and assaults on whoever did not look like they fit Watch the video where they executed one kid, the other who was shot lived because I guess he looked dead so they did not give him coup de grace

Please provide sources.

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#174

Post by Mediterraneo10 »

vidarh wrote: post #111
z9e wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is reason.com being authoritarian here? How is antifa intimidating and attacking political dissenters not closer to a truer authoritarian accusation? I’m not sure where the “antifa is not violent” gaslighting is stemming from, but there’s a tremendous amount of YouTube footage that anyone can objectively discern from what a violent group of people looks like. The violence is not just them, it’s also right wing ag…

The first problem is when people try to treat antifa as an organization rather than as a loose ideology that is supported by groups across a wide spectrum, and then tries to use that to assign guilt by correlation. E.g. the original antifa was set up by the KPD (pre-war German communist party), but many modern antifa groups use logos that incorporates symbols that were used by the SPD to explicitly attack the KPD and…

> opposition to fascism

For me, the problem with contemporary Antifa movements is that either "fascism" is left undefined, or perhaps worse yet, it is defined in a way that actually excludes a lot of the earlier Leftist activism from which Antifa ultimately derives. For example, many of the intellectuals of May '68 (who did, after all, believe that they were anti-fascist and seeking to rid the world of vestiges of Nazism etc.) would actually be considered fascist by probably most self-identified Antifa today, because their framework was pre-feminism and pre-trans-activism.

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#175

Post by gridlockd »

coldpie wrote: post #153
gridlockd wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of these sound reasonable, some of them are completely ridiculous. It's probably for the better of the movement that these demands aren't the subject of (sympathetic) news coverage, because they're way outside the overton window of the general population. In fact, republicans/conservatives could hardly get any better support for their claim that BLM supporters are radical marxists.

Sure. You don't start a negotiation from the middle. Also, most of the actual policy changes would be local. The support of the general population matters much less than the support of those who are impacted. The politicians and leaders need to work out the details and compromises. The point of these protests is that one side has not been listened to, and it is getting people killed, and we're sick of it.

> You don't start a negotiation from the middle.

I agree, but you also shouldn't completely discredit yourself before negotiation has started. What do you even bring to the table? The end of protests? Protests are only being tolerated because of presumed public support, which has been dwindling due to some ugly scenes.

> The politicians and leaders need to work out the details and compromises.

The politicians only need to care about votes. In many areas, the majority already voted in Democrats with the intention of having them fix things, which they didn't.

I would argue that Democrats are generally less principled than Republicans, they're only following what they believe the majority to believe. See the Dixiecrats or their position on gay marriage.

So, without the majority vote you don't have Democrats and without the Democrats, who do you have to support? Republicans? Greens?

> The point of these protests is that one side has not been listened to, and it is getting people killed, and we're sick of it.

I noticed as much, but that doesn't magically bring you into a good bargaining position. MLK was successful because he stayed within the overton window. Malcom X wasn't, because he didn't.

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#176

Post by spaced-out »

cwhiz wrote: post #124
kombucha111 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the police have been making it worse. Using questionable tactics, using disproportionate force, lieing, inciting/supporting one side over the other, using beyond questionable reasoning for declaring a riot, using agent provocateur ...i could go on. Check out Blue Leaks as well. The fact is the majority of the media covering Portland are not showing the whole story.

Citizens have constitutional rights to peaceably assemble. The language is right there in the bill of rights. Police don’t show up and corral peaceful protesters who applied for, and were granted, permits for demonstrations. When an assembly becomes not peaceful it ceases to be lawful. If unlawful protesters do not disperse police must use what you call “questionable” tactics to remove them. The rule of law must be u…

>Police don’t show up and corral peaceful protesters who applied for, and were granted, permits for demonstrations

1. Is it a right if you need to ask permission from the very people you're protesting against?

2. The entire nation watched police tear gas peaceful protestors in DC so the President could have a photo of. We also saw Portland police break the hand of Christopher David, a 53 year old veteran when he approached police, unarmed, with his hands raised.

>The rule of law must be upheld.

The police need to follow the law too.

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#177

Post by blurbleblurble »

fit2rule wrote: post #52
zaroth wrote: post #19

The mainstream news reporting on Portland (and other regional rioting) got to the point where they were bald-faced lying about peaceful protests standing in front of burning buildings. The most charitable interpretation I can think of is that these professional journalists think that their readers can’t understand a nuanced world of gray and need everything reduced to black and white. There can be a concept of “BLM”…

[flagged]

I don't know why this comment got downvoted so heavily. I think what you're saying is insightful. This kind of culture puts the US at high risk of falling deep into the kind of corrupt, low trust world seen e.g. in Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. When manipulative behaviors are normalized and rewarded, manipulative, corrupt people take power. And when the regime's power collapses and the pie starts to shrink, the fighting gets nasty.

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#178

Post by krapp »

gridlockd wrote: post #142
coldpie wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are well articulated lists of demands from leaders of the movements. Not everyone in the gatherings needs to be super well-versed in the policy details to support them. Here are some examples: More modest: https://8cantwait.org/ Larger scale: https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands You can probably find more local information from your local BLM or other social justice organizations. Here is a specific example fr…

Some of these sound reasonable, some of them are completely ridiculous. It's probably for the better of the movement that these demands aren't the subject of (sympathetic) news coverage, because they're way outside the overton window of the general population. In fact, republicans/conservatives could hardly get any better support for their claim that BLM supporters are radical marxists.

> In fact, republicans/conservatives could hardly get any better support for their claim that BLM supporters are radical marxists.

I've read a lot of lists of demands, and most of them seem reasonable to me, and I suspect more would seem reasonable to the general population than you think. I have yet to encounter the demand that private property be abolished in favor of collective ownership, or much else that conforms to actual Marxist ideology.

They're only "Marxist" in the sense that a certain American demographics calls anyone and anything they disagree with "Marxist."

FFS they've called Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama radical Marxists. Greta Thunberg is a Marxist. Literally any leftist, liberal, Democrat and progressive with any visibility is a Marxist. The entirety of mainstream media and social media is Marxists. Fox News criticized the President? Marxists. It doesn't mean anything anymore, it's just a scare tactic.

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#179

Post by sammorrowdrums »

mStreamTeam wrote: post #164
formercoder wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly. I even catch myself doing it too. I’ve had to develop a kind of framework for considering political issues to avoid it: What’s best for me? What’s best for my family? What’s best for my community? What’s best for my country? What’s best for the planet? Often these questions have contradicting answers. However once I think through them, I can at least begin to structure an opinion.

I find it more concerning how quickly people forget the past. In 2016 BLM was responsible for a mass shooting in Dallas and most people I know already forgot this fact. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_poli...

Your phrasing is misleading. BLM isn't responsible. A veteran sympathetic to the cause went on a shooting spree granted, but I don't know how you get from that to "BLM was responsible"

Re: 'You're Not Allowed to Film': The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland

#180

Post by dublinben »

sremani wrote: post #163
sudonim wrote: post #58

There’s reason to be skeptical. From a local Portland journalist covering the protests: https://twitter.com/alex_zee/status/1302284883625046016?s=21 “ Not that I want to legitimize this @reason piece, but I have filmed copious moments of ppl throwing things at police/vandalizing bldgs/etc & have never been told I’m not allowed to film. I have never heard of the so-called “IPC.” The lack of sourcing in this story show…

Apparently @alex_zee is no objective observer and has participated in disinformation. https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1300617725354504192

Neither is Andy Ngo.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo

Post reply on HN