News organizations in Seattle have been ordered by a judge to hand over photographs and videos to the Seattle Police Department to aid investigations into alleged arson of police vehicles and theft of police weapons.
The judge set what some regard as a dangerous precedent that threatens to bring the free press into the domain of a surveillance state.
As reported by the Seattle Times, the Seattle Police Department successfully subpoenaed five Seattle-based news outlets whose reporters were covering events at a protest that took place on May 30th. Typically, unpublished material is protected and not available to law enforcement. King County Superior Court Judge Nelson Lee decided that the Police Department were justified in their request to access the photographs and footage, but must demonstrate that they have exhausted all other means of inquiry. The police will not have access to material captured on reporters’ mobile phones.
The five news outlets — Seattle Times and TV stations KIRO 7, KING 5, KOMO 4 and KCPQ 13 — are expected to appeal the decision.
News organizations may now fear that in the future judges will be able to decide which information their reporters will be forced to turn over to authorities. Furthermore, as observed by Seattle Times Executive Editor Michele Matassa Flores, such a move undermines the independence of the press and might put journalists at risk while reporting.
Lead image by Damien Conway, used under Creative Commons.
You're losing me here and I'm doing my best to keep up; how does this judge's order "take out the journalists"? I agree with the rest of your statement.
Ah. Okay. Thanks.
So many brainwashed people in comment section. The Police is a basic component of every country, it is not possible without it. Right now, police in the United States are having a very difficult time because most of the media have opposed them in an effort to influence the upcoming elections.
The police are for protecting citizens and upholding the law, abducting people and abusing people (even people who are protesting peacefully) isn't something they should do!
Majority of police doing exactly that, protecting citizens and properties. If police will say leave the place you have to leave the place. Thats their job. You totally dont know whats going on and you just folowing fake narrative. They did not nothing like you say in your answer.
Dude stop being such a Trump-fan, there are so many video's online from people getting put in unmarked vans by people with military clothes that have no id's or markings on them! STOP BEING BLIND! Fake narrative, It's a video it's kinda hard to fake it!
How would u like it if somone throws u in a van, without knowing why and who?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJSiV_R2uiI
:D you are so funny "without knowing why and who?" "STOP BEING BLIND!?" Dude they have an uniform :D! how you can write "without knowing why and who?" .... check the video from Chris Chappell
And where do u see their names? Or when are they answering any questions, I also don't see a badge anywhere? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGgJCyvxdQg
And yeah U are blind if u keep defending the dumbest president in the world! U do know everyone in the world laughs with the US?!
Nothings happen there, they are not there for talking with rioters, this guy had helmet and equipments which protect him during the clash with police. Of course he is suspicious person. They had uniform so he can clearly see they working for government. You are really totally brainwashed. :)
Why all the Trump trolls posting here? They defend a failed presidency, one that never sought to unite the country, only to further a still unknown agenda which seems to want to ‘break’ the country anyway it can. I understand there are many people posting here that are not interested in photography, but only what social media avenues they can usurp.
The next time you open your mouth, start and end your sentences with "squawk. squawk". That's basically all you're doing.
Sadly, social media has more information than mainstream media.
As opposed to Trumpish trolling a photo blog? Many social media pundits and trolls, are criminal, when it comes to the pandemic. In my country the amount of threats against public figures has skyrocketed since social media infected the minds of less educated.
Wrong, again. Mainstream media has manipulated the narrative of the protests as peaceful and cops are bad. Then, gullible fools like you drink whatever they poor in the cup. You turn a blind eye to the outcome in a lot of these "peaceful" protests. The reason I'm picking on the media more than the libs and Dems is because there was a time when we could trust the media. But, nowadays, oh, hell no. As for libs and Dems, we know they lie and are divisive so no surprise there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJSiV_R2uiI
They following instruction to prevent doxing
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/feds-unmarked-vans-portland/
Do you think that if the 'protesters' were peaceful and weren't destroying private/public property that the judge would have given this order?
I don't live in the US, so forgive me if my questions sound naive, but here they are: If a media has pictures that could help solve a murder, wouldn't they be required to hand them over to the investigators if asked? And if they're not required to do so, wouldn't they do it anyway, as a civic duty? And if they would do it for a murder, why wouldn't they do it for another kind of crime?
Photographers, or those who pay attention to a visual record, should be some of the first to realize that what one sees in media or within these complex political machinations of public interaction, is that PAID provocateur’s are often the ones who are destroying property. This is a fundamental truth of every urban human rights protest that escalates to confrontation. Period.
I am not a fan of bad language, but direct and crude vs sneeky agenda, I find direct to still be much better. I totally get why he doesn't even try anymore.
I really don't want to continue this but have to ask, you aren't a fan of bad language but it doesn't bother you to make assumptions regarding people's intentions and motivations? And that is somehow different from a sneaky agenda, which I haven't seen demonstrated in this thread except from our erstwhile Mr. McButterly.
All that aside, I really like your car and airplane photos.
If only it were that simple. While Dingus is the poster child for the disruption of intelligent debate, he's certainly not the only one, from either side of any given subject. Also, it would be helpful if Fstoppers didn't publish such inflammatory articles with the obvious intent of stirring the pot.
As an aside, when I do find an article, firmly based on photography, discarding the this vs that gear articles, and comment for some reason, I find myself one of a very few people to do so. Maybe that's why they publish articles like this one: articles about photography just don't generate comments which advertisers probably use as a metric for what they're getting for their money.
Nope, this is about the press and photography and some, definitely you included, have turned it into a riot debate. Don't attempt at manipulating the comments and things will be fine.
Are you reading my comments as stand-alone opinions or conflating the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you? That was rhetorical; I'm not interested in an answer. How have I manipulated the comments?
As a small business owner (most of us here are, I assume), I respectfully suggest another term other than "protest" for activities where innocent businesses get looted, torched, vandalized and shut down for months on end while any cops who actually try to stop it or protect publicly funded buildings and monuments from the so called "protesters" are incessantly assaulted every night in various major American cities.
Now having said that - Constitution first. Not sure where the appropriate legal line is there, but I would think it's not unusual for news organizations with video evidence of crimes to share that with law enforcement, and if a judge has ordered it, it's open to appeal - so we will see if it's Constitutional or not.
I just read through this comments section, very exhausting... lots of people can talk a lot of waffle.