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

121–130 of 325 posts

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

#121

Post by luckylion »

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…

That's pretty expected though: if you're on somebody's side, they're usually not treating you as an enemy (not getting on any lists!), won't try to stop you from filming and generally treat you nicely.

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

#122

Post by conception »

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”…

This thread is obviously going to get very political but I feel like before people get too anti fascists vs nonviolence should check some of the history they were taught in school for cracks. A few threads worth reading -

https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/127007628104079769...

https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/118646830240050790...

https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/12248810051...

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

#123

Post by liability »

czbond wrote: post #65
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”…

The small acts of violence are either a brilliant strategy move of RNC, or a lapse of strategy on the far left. Small bouts of violence are completely de-lever the strategic impact of the intended gatherings from an optics perspective. Someone smart realized that if violence dominoes a bit, along with some press leverage, it creates families afraid of 'defunded police and personal safety issues'. The allowance in Chi…

> The small acts of violence are either a brilliant strategy move of RNC, or a lapse of strategy on the far left.

There's another option: it's neither of these because neither political party actually has control over the solution. They're both reacting to the actions of individuals they cannot control. If Nancy Pelosi and Trump both got together for a heartwarming bipartisan plea for both 'sides' in Portland to settle down, I don't think it would change anything because neither the RNC nor the DNC are actually calling the shots.

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

#124

Post by cwhiz »

kombucha111 wrote: post #106
cwhiz wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Police are making it a battleground? Not the people throwing Molotov cocktails, fireworks, and bricks. No, it is the police who have made it a battleground.

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 upheld.

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

#125

Post by Mediterraneo10 »

coldpie wrote: post #113
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have also seen little reporting on what I suspect (admittedly, merely judging from photos) has driven a lot of the more confrontational protesting in Portland: youthful energy and enthusiasm that doesn’t actually think that much about theory or aims. Press coverage and the attacks of ideological opponents depict these protestors as a focused political force that knows exactly what it seeks and why it is doing the s…

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…

"Not everyone in the gatherings needs to be super well-versed in the policy details to support them."

It's not that they don't know the finer policy details, it's that many of the on-the-ground protestors probably aren't even aware of every one of these demands. When young people are driven to attend protests because of the general outrage about black victims of police violence, how many of them really know, for example, that payment of reparations is part of a list of demands that has been published somewhere?

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

#126

Post by watwut »

compiler-guy wrote: post #107
watwut wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when the people think the police is endangering their safety, does the job badly and abuses power given to them or breaks the law, what are people supposed to do?

At least one thing that you do is allow others the freedom you want for yourself.

What freedom you have in mind? Afaik the exchange was 1.) about whether police can be blanket assumed to be the "good guys" due to that being presumed original intent. 2.) Whether and how ir is legitimate to protest if they are not "good" in practice.

I am not asking for any special freedom. I do find second question interesting and complicated. I do have own answer to question one (namely that blanket trust is super naive of course low paid force with few weak checks will end up having bad actors in it and it is then question of pruning them out or not).

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

#127

Post by macinjosh »

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.

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

#128

Post by macinjosh »

jkhdigital wrote: post #21
ptero wrote: post #11

This is the environment in which the journalism originally flourished: obtaining and reporting information that is not readily accessible otherwise, often against the wishes of the powers on the ground; and frequently being in danger while obtaining it. I am not glorifying this setup, it is horrible; but the information it provides is very valuable. Unfortunately, nowadays the journalist working on such project will…

What’s weird is that the script is flipped here, if this article is to be believed: it is the alleged “underdog” that is attempting to suppress journalistic freedom (through intimidation) to control the news narrative.

Reality isn’t a movie script.

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

#129

Post by lawwantsin17 »

jpxw wrote: post #53
snsr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling anyone from the Daily Caller a “reporter” is charitable at best.

Whether or not you think they’re “reporters” is irrelevant to whether they should be allowed to film.

That's why they made it the lead of the article. They can't defend anything else about the response to the protests so they try and say the protestors are being illiberal. It's all BS dude. Wise up. 1st Amendment happening in PDX and they gotta not get killed by police and Proud Boys while they're at it.

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

#130

Post by rbecker »

UncleSlacky wrote: post #38
josteink wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> any "mostly peaceful" claims can and should be dismissed as unverifiable I honestly thought “mostly peaceful” was a meme at this point. With cities on fire for months and months, how can anyone take such a claim seriously? Edit: Twitter seems to agree with me. https://twitter.com/search?q=%23MostlyPeaceful

According to this report, most BLM protests have been peaceful: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/05/nearly-all-bla... original report here: https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-vi...

What a fascinating report. It takes time to name the people wrongly killed by police, detail their deaths, but doesn't mention anyone killed by people who might be associated with BLM. It doesn't bother to so much as give a number of fatalities! Well we know there were at least some: https://apnews.com/864cb5c14ba08b4411a16577042d0773

The same approach is taken to other areas: Violence by police gets described in detail, violence by protesters gets a brief statistic such as "Post-deployment, the percentage of violent demonstrations has risen from under 17% to over 42%".

I must say I was shocked when the report managed to mention how many Rittenhouse shot, but omitted that he was shot at himself, and was on the floor, being hit in the head with a skateboard when he shot the 2nd and 3rd persons. Oh but it did mention Trump failed to condemn his actions - that part was important enough to include.

Post reply on HN