Search

NPPA Joined by 32 Other Media Groups Urges Gov. Brown to Veto CA Anti-Drone Bill

September 3rd, 2015 by Mickey Osterreicher and tagged , , , , , , ,

Today the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) sent a letter to California Governor Jerry Brown urging him to veto SB 142, which would create strict liability for anyone operating a drone over the “airspace overlaying the real property” of another person or entity without “express consent.” The letter was joined by 32 other media organizations.

“We believe this bill will unduly restrict the development of new uses for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) by establishing a technology-specific restriction that is impossible to comply with, impossible to enforce, and likely will conflict with the existing authority and proposed new regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), said NPPA general counsel Mickey H. Osterreicher, in the letter. He went on to say, “while the bill acknowledges the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, its language flies in the face of both common sense and federal preemption,” adding “the chilling legal repercussions of this bill will tax an overburdened court system and thwart the federal government’s efforts, in which we are participating, to bring about a sensible regulatory regime for this new technology.”

Those groups joining in the letter are: Advance Publications, Inc., American Society of News Editors, Associated Press Media Editors, Associated Press Photo Managers, Association of Alternative Newsmedia, CNN, First Look Media, Inc., Gannett Co., Inc., Hearst Corporation, KBAK-TV (Bakersfield), KERO-TV (Bakersfield), KGTV-TV (San Diego), KMPH-TV (Fresno), KXTV-TV (Sacramento), Los Angeles Times Communications LLC, Merced Sun-Star, Newspaper Association of America, Radio Television Digital News Association, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Scripps Media, Society of Professional Journalists, Student Press Law Center, The Associated Press, The Desert Sun, Palm Springs, The Fresno Bee, The McClatchy Company, The Modesto Bee, The Sacramento Bee, The Salinas Californian, The (San Luis Obispo) Tribune, Tulare Advance-Register and Visalia Times-Delta.

 

Posted in Access, broadcasting, California, drone, Drones, First Amendment, First Amendment rights, Newsgathering, photographers, photojournalism | No Comments »

FAA Announces Proposed Drone Rules: will allow use of UAS under 55 lbs., under 500 ft; certification required

February 15th, 2015 by Alicia Calzada

Today the FAA proposed allowing drone flights within line of sight, during daylight hours only, and with a special operator’s certification. The FAA  announced its long-awaited proposed rules, for the regulation of small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS, or sUAVs), commonly referred to as drones. The NPPA is reviewing the rules, and the entire text of the proposed rules are not yet available, but based on the initial information released by the FAA, the rules appear to be an overall positive development for photojournalists and will address safety while enabling photographers to use the technology with fewer onerous restrictions than were expected.

“While we still need to review the proposed rule in its entirety, we are very encouraged that the FAA has chosen to follow the commonsense and less burdensome  approach to its rulemaking that NPPA has been advocating for over the past few years,” said Mickey H. Osterreicher, NPPA general counsel who was on today’s call with the FAA.

Under the proposed rules, sUAS flights will only be permitted during daylight hours, cannot go more than 500 feet above ground level, cannot be operated over any people who are not directly involved in the operation, must stay clear of other aircraft, and the UAS must remain within the line of unaided sight (no binoculars) of the operator or visual observer. However, there seems to be accommodation for the use of a visual observer in the rules. Remote cameras would not satisfy the visual-line-of-sight requirement but could be used as long as the UAS were still within the line of sight of the operator or observer.

NPPA president Mark Dolan commented, “the NPPA has been involved with this issue from the very beginning through our advocacy committee, which has consistently offered opinions and advice at every stage of the discussion. We are happy to see the FAA seems to have followed the spirit of that advice in taking a thoughtful and measured approach to the issue rather than take an extreme and restrictive stance, which can so often be the official reaction when faced with any type of new technology.” Dolan added that NPPA, “will continue to observe, and weigh in on, this issue as it moves through the public comment period of the FAA’s  rule-making process,” he added.

Under the proposal, the sUAS must weigh under 55 lbs. Pilots of small UAS, called operators, must be over 17; would be required to pass an initial aeronautical knowledge test at an FAA-approved center; be vetted by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA); obtain a sUAS operator certificate which never expires (unless revoked), and pass a recurrent test every 24 months. An individual with a private pilot’s license will still need to obtain a sUAS operator certificate to pilot a sUAS. Once certified, the operator can pilot any type of UAS for commercial purposes, “so long as you are flying within the parameters of the rule, line-of-sight, etc.” said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta this morning. The FAA has long considered photojournalism to be a “commercial” enterprise for the purposes of its rules on sUAS. Hobbyist’s use of sUAS will not require a certificate.

Operators will be required to conduct a pre-flight inspection to ensure that the small UAS is safe for operation, and must report to the FAA any accidents which result in injury or property damage within 10 days.

The proposed rules also considers the idea that there might be a “microUAS” category for UAS under 4.4 pounds “that would allow operations in Class G airspace, over people not involved in the operation, provided the operator certifies he or she has the requisite aeronautical knowledge to perform the operation.”

The rules were presented in a hastily announced, mid-holiday weekend press conference, and are further outlined in a press release. The NPPA cautions its members that these are proposed rules and as such those wishing to operate sUAS must still petition for a section 333 exemption, although that petition (unlike previously granted petitions which included a pilot’s certificate) would now most likely be approved following the guidelines in the new NPRM. “It is also important to remember that while these proposed rules address safety issues, today the President also signed a memorandum (similar to an executive order) ensuring that the government’s drone uses don’t violate the First Amendment,” Osterreicher said. “That memo also tasks the Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) with developing privacy and transparency rules for drone use,” Osterreicher added. The privacy issue is one that has been currently addressed by a patchwork of state legislation throughout the country.

The FAA will be accepting comments from the public for at least 60 days. Therefore the rules won’t go into effect until after the rulemaking period is over, which could still take another 2 years. The proposed rules are expected to be posted at this link later today: http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/

 

Posted in broadcasting, drone, Drones, FAA, First Amendment, National Press Photographers Association, News Photography, Newsgathering, NPPA, photographers, photojournalism, small unmanned aerial systems, sUAS, UAS, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) | No Comments »

NPPA Joins Coalition for Court Transparency

February 18th, 2014 by Mickey Osterreicher and tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) announced that it had joined the Coalition for Court Transparency (CCT). Citing long lines outside the Supreme Court and the millions of Americans who are interested in, and affected by, the Court’s decisions but unable to see cases being argued, this new alliance of media and legal organizations from across the political spectrum today launched a television ad campaign calling on the justices to allow cameras to televise oral arguments.

The Coalition is taking the unprecedented step of using an ad campaign to draw attention to the lack of transparency in this powerful branch of government and to urge the Justices to change this outdated restriction.

“NPPA strongly believes in greater transparency at the U.S. Supreme Court.  Our support of the bipartisan coalition underscores our belief that the collective voice of CCT-member organizations ultimately can bring about the necessary changes in court policy,” said NPPA president Mark J. Dolan.

While Congress has debated bipartisan, bicameral bills intended to compel Supreme Court justices to allow cameras over the last 15 years, legal experts agree that the justices could simply decide today to allow cameras – and Monday’s cases regarding the Environment Protection Agency and its authority to address greenhouse gas pollution would be televised. In the past C-SPAN officials have stated that the station would broadcast all of the Supreme Court’s oral arguments if allowed.

Currently, to attend Supreme Court hearings, individuals must stand in line outside the building on First Street NE and wait to be ushered in. There are roughly 400 seats in the courtroom, so many people hoping to view the arguments are unable to, especially in cases that have broad public interest, such as the marriage equality, voting rights, and affirmative action cases last term and the campaign finance, recess appointments, and public prayer cases this term. For these types of cases, interested parties must often line up hours, if not days, in advance of the arguments and in some instances pay thousands of dollars to “line-standers” to hold their places for them.

In addition to NPPA, members of the Coalition for Court Transparency are: Alliance for Justice, American Society of News Editors, Constitutional Accountability Center, Liberty Coalition, National Association of Broadcasters, National Press Foundation, OpenTheGovernment.org, Radio Television Digital News Association, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and Society for Professional Journalists.

“As one element in our democracy’s system of checks and balances, the U.S. Supreme Court is a vital institution that increasingly is growing in importance.  As such, NPPA believes that citizens have a right to view broadcasts of the court’s oral arguments and announcements of its opinions on cases,” said NPPA Executive Director Charles W. L. (“Chip”) Deale.

Despite the Supreme Court’s own reluctance on cameras, Americans have greater access to high-level judicial hearings elsewhere in the country. All 50 state supreme courts permit recording equipment to varying degrees, and on the federal level the Judicial Conference of the United States has placed cameras in 14 federal courts as part of a three-year, multi-district pilot program to study the effect of broadcasting federal court proceedings.

As the Voice of Visual Journalists since 1946, the NPPA has long advocated for cameras in the courtroom on the state and federal level as the lack of transparency erodes public confidence in the Court. Our general counsel, Mickey H. Osterreicher, has written extensively about the subject and we believe the first way for the public to learn about and understand U.S. Supreme Court decisions is for citizens to be able to watch and hear those cases being announced by and argued before the court.

The ad, a 30-second television spot titled “Everywhere,” will run nearly 300 times in the Washington, D.C., market on cable news outlets over the next few weeks.   The Coalition also announced today that through its website, OpenSCOTUS.com, concerned Americans can sign an online petition calling on Chief Justice John Roberts to allow cameras in the Court.

“Everywhere” script

“The Supreme Court’s decisions impact the lives of Americans everywhere. But only a privileged few get to witness history and see justice in action. Leading Republicans and Democrats and a large majority of Americans support a simple fix – putting cameras in the Supreme Court. State and federal courts allow cameras in the interest of transparency. Shouldn’t our nation’s top court do the same? It’s time for a more open judiciary. It’s time for cameras in the Supreme Court. Find out more and take action at OpenSCOTUS.com.”

To view the ad, visit OpenSCOTUS.com.

For more information contact Mickey H. Osterreicher at 716.983.7800 or [email protected]

For more information about the Coalition for Court Transparency, please contact CCT spokesperson Gabe Roth at 202-464-6919 (office), 312-545-8556 (cell) or [email protected].

URL: http://www.OpenSCOTUS.com

Twitter: http://twitter.com/OpenSCOTUS

Facebook: http://facebook.com/OpenSCOTUS

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/openscotus

Change.org petition:​ https://www.change.org/petitions/chief-justice-john-roberts-it-s-time-for-cameras-in-the-supreme-court-3

Posted in Access, broadcasting, Cameras in the Courtroom, First Amendment, First Amendment rights, National Press Photographers Association, News Photography, Newsgathering, NPPA, Open Government, photographers, photojournalism, SCOTUS, US Supreme Court, Visual Journalists | No Comments »

Covering the Conventions and Protests

August 7th, 2012 by Mickey Osterreicher and tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

                                                            © 2012 Photo by Mickey Osterreicher

*** UPDATE 09-05-12 ***

Things to know while covering the DNC in Charlotte today

DNC on Wednesday: president arrives; new protests, closures

Charlotte Road Closures for Wednesday 9/5/12

*** UPDATE 09-04-12 ***

Here’s where you can park in Charlotte today

Charlotte Road Road Closures for Tuesday 9/4/12

*** UPDATE 09-03-12 ***

Charlotte Road Road Closures for Monday 9/3/12

First Lady to arrive in Charlotte on Monday

Details for CarolinaFest on Monday

*** UPDATE 09-02-12 ***

Two arrested during first DNC march of about 700 protestors in Charlotte

Security intensifying in Charlotte as DNC gets closer

 *** UPDATE 09-01-12 ***

Occupy Charlotte re-opens camp blocks from DNC at Marshall Park. Expect buses carrying protesters from Tampa and other cities to begin arriving this weekend.

 *** UPDATE 08-26-12 ***

Tampa Joint Information Center (JIC) Announcement #1

RNC cancels events in expectation of Isaac with tropical storm warning in effect. Driving rain & winds 39-73 mph tonight. Also expected – flooding and increased risk of tornadoes

 *** UPDATE 08-25-12 ***

Republican Convention in Tampa will convene on Monday and immediately recess due to Tropical Storm Isaac says Chair Reince Priebus on Saturday night,

Occupy Tampa events calendar for RNC in Tampa

Secret Service designated road closures for the RNC in Tampa begin today at noon and remain in effect thru 6 pm on 8/31/12

Tampa Police, ACLU team up for tips for RNC protesters and media

*** UPDATE 08-24-12 ***

Please use #Journarrest on Twitter to obtain the latest information about or to report an arrest of a journalist

Updated RNC Security Map

Click here for RNC Protest Information Updates

5,000 person protest march planned for Monday, 8/27/12 in Tampa

*** UPDATE 08-23-12 ***

Announcing a Guide to Reporting at the 2012 Republican and Democratic National Conventions. The Digital Media Law Project (which supports indy and online journalists) just released an amazing guidebook for reporting on the conventions. Everything from local laws to closed streets and prohibited items and resources for dealing with police and secret service… it’s a huge resource and should be really valuable

Media Logistics Briefing at the RNC for Credentialed Journalists – Media credentials, transportation, perimeter, operations and security to be discussed

Free Press – The Right to Record

Some Conventional Wisdom: Looking at the ’72 DNC in Miami Beach 40 Years After

*** UPDATE 08-22-12 ***

Severe WX: With the projected path of Tropical Storm Isaac expected to come close to Tampa make sure you bring foul weather gear 

RNC – Security Perimeter – Prohibited items. As stated on this site “As a condition of entry, the following items are inadmissible for safety and security reasons and will not be permitted within the security perimeter established for the 2012 Republican National Convention.” The “security perimeter” is the area controlled by the RNC and Secret Service. Proper credentials (delegates, media, etc.) will be required to enter that area.

It also appears that those entering the security perimeter with “Media” credentials will be exempt from the prohibition against:

Camcorders and cases, large cameras with lens (over four inches); Voice enhancement devices, such as bullhorn; Tripods for cameras; Backpacks or carry cases for binoculars, cameras.”

*** UPDATE 08-20-12 ***

RNC: Tampa Security Zone & Street Closures Map. Also RNC Security Plan Info 

DNC: Security Zone Maps:Vehicle restrictions around TWC ArenaPedestrian restrictions around TWC ArenaVehicle restrictions around BofA StadiumPedestrian restrictions around BofA StadiumRestrictions around government center complexRestrictions around Charlotte Convention Center

*** UPDATE 08-16-12 ***

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press has Published its Hotline Numbers for both Conventions. Write these numbers down and keep them readily accessible. Do not just put them in your cellphone as that might be seized if your are arrested!!!!

Visual Journalists may also contact me by phone or text at 716-983-7800. I will be present at both conventions.

Republican National Convention, Tampa, FL

  • Hotline: 813-984-3076 or 813-984-3078
  • Legal Counsel: Thomas & LoCicero PL
  • Operation: The local hotline will remain open around the clock from Friday, Aug. 24 through the end of the convention

Democratic National Convention, Charlotte, NC

  • Hotline: 704-343-2063; backup numbers 704-904-5834 or 919-428-5883
  • Legal Counsel: McGuireWoods LLP
  • Operation: The local hotline will be in service 24 hours a day from Friday, Aug. 31 through the end of the convention

Overview

In preparation for the expected protests during the upcoming political conventions being held in Tampa, FL (Republican – August 27-30) and Charlotte, NC (Democratic – September 3-6) I have conducted training with the police agencies in both cities regarding 1st and 4th Amendment rights of citizens and journalists. It is our hope to avoid a repeat of the interference with and the arrest of journalists that occurred four years ago in Denver and St. Paul.

NPPA was also instrumental in working with the Chicago Police Department prior to and during the NATO Summit held in May. I provided training to about 200 supervisory officers in April that was well received and was out on the streets along with police, protesters and the media for three days of marches and rallies throughout the city.

If the NATO protests were any indication, then journalists covering events outside the conventions can expect that everyone–mainstream media, bloggers, citizen journalists, protesters, and bystanders–will have a camera of one kind or another. With the widespread proliferation of cellphone cameras, capable of recording high-quality images along with audio and video, it seemed like everybody was documenting everything and everyone.

Legal Issues

For journalists recording audio of any type there was a heightened concern in Illinois that police would be enforcing the state’s Eavesdropping Act, which criminalizes (with a possible sentence of 15 years in jail) audio recording of police officers performing official duties in a public place without their consent but fortunately in the case of ACLU v. Alvarez, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit found the law to be unconstitutional only days before the start of the summit and granted a preliminary injunction against its enforcement. The Illinois State’s Attorney has indicated that she intends to appeal that decision to the U.S. Supreme Court this fall.

In a similar case – Glik v. Cunniffe, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that individuals possess “a constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties.” For those covering the Tampa convention, the Eleventh Circuit (which is controlling in Florida) also recognized a “First Amendment right . . . to photograph or videotape police conduct” in the 2000 case of Smith v. Cumming. And for those covering events in Charlotte, the law in the Fourth Circuit (which is controlling in North Carolina) is less settled, according to a 2009 one-page, unpublished per curium conclusory opinion in Szymecki v. Houck, that the “right to record police activities on public property was not clearly established in this circuit at the time of the alleged conduct.”

NPPA asserts that the right to observe and record police officers performing their duties in a public place is a recognized form of free speech through which the press and the public may gather and disseminate information on matters of public concern. First Amendment protections regarding such activity, while not absolute, may only be limited by reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions, the courts ruled in Glik and Smith.

But the “reasonableness” of a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction is often in the eyes of the beholder. Police issuing an order to disperse may expect everyone including those with cameras to leave the area while journalists may believe that moving back or out of the way constitutes compliance.

Local Ordinances

Both Tampa and Charlotte have established security zones (see Tampa Secret Service info) around their respective convention centers. Those ordinances also ban a long list of items deemed to be potential weapons, so journalists who might come prepared with gas masks may find they are violating the new restrictions by carrying one. Also prohibited from places designated as “public viewing areas” are: “sticks, poles, ladders, monopods, bipods, and tripods.” These cities have also established “free speech zones,” where permitted marches may take place and speakers may address the public. It is also important to note that many of the streets in Charlotte that appear to be public are actually privately owned by many of the banks in that city, which may further complicate the right to record.

Federal Trespass

Another concern will be the enforcement of H.R. 347 also known as “The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011,” which was signed into law in March, making it a federal offense to cause a disturbance at certain events. More specifically, anyone who trespasses on specified property or at times and locations “so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance” may be prosecuted and subject to a fine or imprisonment or both. Both conventions have been designated a “National Special Security Event” by the Department of Homeland Security.

Under this “trespass bill” anyone “knowingly” entering a restricted area under Secret Service control who “engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct” or “who, with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds; or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished” accordingly. The bill also creates a floating bubble of protection around the president and other dignitaries, so although those covering the protests may be outside of the designated zones, they may still fall under the ambit of the law.

Other Resources

NPPA has also been working with a number of other organizations including the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the National Lawyers Guild (NLG), the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). The RCFP has recently made available a mobile app for reporters that, according to its website, “gives reporters in the field immediate access to legal resources, particularly in situations where newsgathering or access may be stymied.” They also have a handbook entitled “Police, Protesters and the Press” available for free download. Additionally the Reporters Committee has partnered with prominent law firms in Tampa and Charlotte to assist “journalists who may be impeded or arrested” in those cities while covering the news. As I did in Chicago I have been working with the lawyers at Thomas & LoCicero in Tampa and McGuireWoods LLP in Charlotte. These firms will be providing free 24-hour legal assistance through a hotline available for journalists covering events in those cities. The RCFP main hotline number is 800-336-4243. Write important numbers down on your arm or another easily viewed part of your body so you have them if you need them.

It might also be informative to look at a recent study of human rights violations by police against those covering OWS as well as a story about a settlement in a federal lawsuit by a journalist who was arrested during the 2009 G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh.

Important Items

Important items to always have with you: government-issued photo I.D. (i.e. valid driver’s license), press credential(s) or press identification card(s) (if you have any), credit card(s) and some cash (in case you need to post bond). For its members NPPA also has available for purchase a “Member ID” which some have found a useful form of identification.

Potential for Arrest

When covering demonstrations, protests, marches and rallies you should be aware that there is a risk of arrest. Just because you may be a journalist, have a camera or believe that you have a lawful reason for being present to observe, document and report on these events does not provide immunity from being arrested along with those participating in these events. For example do not expect that you will be able to cross or walk through police lines. If you need to do so it is always advisable to seek permission before acting.

Complying with Police Orders

If a police officer orders you to move it is advisable to comply with the request. How far you move is something that you will have to decide for yourself. If you believe that the order is not a reasonable one, ask to speak to a supervisor or the public information officer if that is possible. It is important to be very aware that most police officer do not like to be questioned or challenged once they have told you to do (or not do) something and a mere hesitation, question or request may result in your detention or arrest. Only you can make that judgment call as to what to do. Every situation is different as is every police officer’s reaction to your behavior. For the most part officers have been trained to respond in an appropriate manner, but given that we all have different personalities and the fact that they may be standing out in the summer heat for many hours, sometimes in helmets and riot gear you should not necessarily count on them to be as reasonable as you might like.

Being Questioned or Detained

If you are questioned or detained remember to remain calm and act professionally. Do not get into an argument about your rights. If you are able to have a reasonable discussion that is one thing but if it becomes apparent that the officer is not interested in your point of view it is usually best to move on. Discretion is the better part of valor. If you are told that you are not free to leave or under arrest it is strongly advised that you immediately do what you are told. Officers deem anything less than full compliance as resisting arrest and will then escalate the force they believe is necessary to effectuate that arrest. That means you may be forcibly thrown to the ground, set upon by more than one officer and have your equipment broken in the process. This may occur not matter how compliant you are, but it best to cooperate to the fullest extent possible. It is also important that you identify yourself as a journalist as often as possible so there is no question who you are or what your purpose was in being there. At the first appropriate moment request that a commanding officer or the PIO be notified that a journalist is being detained or has been arrested.

Your Files

While covering these events police may ask to see your images, recordings or files. Be aware that you do not have to consent to such a request. They may try to intimidate, coerce or threaten you into doing so but “consent” must be voluntary. You should know that absent consent or “exigent circumstances” an officer may not seize your camera. Exigent circumstances only exist where an officer has probable cause to believe a crime has been committed AND that you have captured evidence of that crime on your camera AND that there is also a strong likelihood that such evidence may be lost if the camera is not seized. This last element should be difficult if not impossible to satisfy given that the main purpose of a journalist is to gather and disseminate information and images.  Even when police do seize a camera they cannot view its contents without a proper warrant. There have been other instances where police have ordered journalists to delete files or have exercised self-help by deleting those files themselves. According to the Department of Justice “under the First Amendment, there are no circumstances under which the contents of a camera or recording device should be deleted or destroyed” (emphasis added).

For many of the reasons listed above it is very important that journalists work in pairs or groups so that someone may be able to notify those of us working to protect your rights that you have been arrested or are in police custody. Another suggestion is that, to the extent possible, start recording events before a situation becomes a problem and continue to record for as long as possible. Such recordings may be the best evidence to refute whatever you may be charged with.

Also be aware that many police agencies will be working at these events. The Secret Service, FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will all have a presence as will the state police along with local city and county agencies. Each has an area of jurisdiction and each may be tasked with enforcing certain laws and ordinances. Just because you receive permission from one officer does not mean that another officer only a few feet away may deny that request. Don’t expect things to make perfect sense. Try to be flexible, creative and patient while covering these situations.

Arrest & Release

If you are arrested it is crucial to remember that anything you say may be used against you and possibly lead to additional charges. Saying you are a journalist is one thing. Talking about what happened is another. The charges against journalists arrested in these situations are usually misdemeanors, violations or infractions. Such charges may include but are not limited to: disorderly conduct, failure to disperse, trespassing, unlawful assembly, disturbing the peace, failure to follow a police order and obstruction. If you are arrested expect to be handcuffed behind your back (with traditional metal handcuffs or plastic zip-tie cuffs). You will also have to be processed, which includes having your fingerprints and photograph taken and your personal information such name, address, age,  date of birth and social security number run through a national computer check for any previous criminal record or outstanding wants (other law enforcement agency looking for you) or warrants.

Once that process is complete (which may take hours depending on the number of those arrested and the number of officers assigned to booking) and depending on the charges bail will be set. Bail acts as a monetary guarantee that you will return for further court proceedings. Sometimes you may be released in your own recognizance (no money required) but that is unlikely if you are from out-of-town. In most you may be able to post a bond (another form of bail) or have someone do that for you.

The type of bond most often used for the types of charges listed above is known as a Signature or I-Bond. Such a bond requires that you post a minimal amount of money (i.e. $75.00 – $200.00) by cash or credit card.  It is very important that you receive and securely keep your bond receipt because it usually contains all the information for your next court appearance including the date and location. You will also need that receipt in order get your money back once your case has been adjudicated. If you fail to appear in court the money posted will be forfeited to the court, an arrest warrant will be issued and once found you may be arrested again.

Practical Advice

In terms of practical advice, aside from looking for great images make sure you maintain “situational awareness” or in simpler terms – know what is going on around you and how it might affect your safety. Not only is it important to be aware of what the police are doing but after this past May Day demonstration where journalists were attacked by those who did not want to be photographed or just did not like the main stream media you should also keep an eye on those who might wish to cause you harm. See the Anarchist News posting.

It is very important to pay attention to your gut instinct and always look toward having a safe way out of the crowd. Once again, I would strongly recommend working in pairs or in a group so that you can watch each other’s backs (it is easy to get tunnel vision when your eye is up to the viewfinder). This also will help should you be injured or arrested and are unable to notify anyone of your situation. Fortunately for Getty’s Joshua Lott, he was with Scott Olson who immediately reported Josh’s arrest and we (the attorney for the RCFP and me) were able to immediately contact the Chicago Police, get the initial felony charges of mob-action reduced to the misdemeanor reckless conduct and obtain his release a short time later.

Training for law enforcement officers has included advice regarding the rights of journalists and the directive that they are not to be interfered with so long as they do not violate the law, create a safety hazard or interfere with police operations. While identifying yourself as a journalist may reduce the likelihood of arrest or help speed your release the best practice is to avoid being caught-up in a mass arrest by remaining near the edge of any large demonstration and also leaving yourself an avenue of escape if needed.

Preparation

It goes without saying that it will be hot in Tampa at the end of August and not much cooler in Charlotte during the first week in September. Stay hydrated. Have plenty of water with you (also be on the lookout for places where they will be providing free bottles of water). Stay in the shade when possible.

Wear light-colored, loose-fitting clothing. Dress neatly – if you don’t want to be confused with the protesters try to find a way to not look like them. Wear sunglasses and a hat. Apply sunscreen liberally and often. Watch out for fire ants if you do sit down anywhere outside. Be aware of the weather and check weather reports. Aside from it being hurricane season, thunderstorms are a common occurrence so watch out for lightening.

You may also consider purchasing a plastic insert for the inside of a baseball hat which will keep the sun off your head and provide some protection “against lacerations, bumps and scrapes to the head area.”

There is some debate about wearing vests or hats with PRESS written in large type. On one hand it leaves no doubt about your purpose but on the other may make you a target. The one thing you should do is clearly display your press credentials or ID’s if you have them.

Other items you may wish to have with you are eye protection and something to cover your nose and mouth with such as a surgical or painters mask. Of course sometimes wearing a mask will bring you extra police scrutiny but if the police have already deployed OC spray or other crowd control agents the benefit of the mask might well outweigh the downside. If you wear contact lenses consider going back to wearing glasses for the time you are out covering the protests. See How to prepare for OC Spray.

Your Equipment

Visual journalists carry equipment ranging from a cellphone camera or a simple point-and-shoot to high-end digital cameras, Betacams, laptops and other gear worth thousands of dollars. No matter what you use, the equipment is essential to doing your job and its safety and security should be of utmost importance to prevent it from becoming damaged, lost, stolen or seized.

For those who use Apple products, make sure that you activate the tracking and auto-lock features on their iPhones and iPads. Also be sure to write down the description and serial numbers of all your equipment and devices and store that list in a safe but easily accessible place in order to file a complete police report and to expedite recovery if they are stolen.

As for camera equipment, some also suggest being well connected to your gear using “Sun Sniper” straps that have steel cables running through them.

Also make backups of all your important files and keep it on a remote computer or USB drive which you have stored in a safe and secure place. Consider using the Cloud or similar remote storage for these files as well for livestreaming of your images in case your camera is lost, stolen or seized by police. For more info on staying safe read Poynter.

Conclusion

Police in Chicago exercised considerable restraint in allowing protesters to move into non-designated areas and did not interfere with non-permitted marches. The Chicago police also did not distinguish between credentialed and non-credentialed journalists when allowing access to most public places and, except for arresting a Getty photographer, did not interfere with those taking pictures, recording video, or livestreaming events. Given that command staff from both the Tampa and Charlotte-Mecklenburg police departments were present in Chicago to observe, it can only be hoped that they will take the same reasonable approach in dealing with these issues.

If you get into trouble or have questions about certain situations please feel free to contact me by email at [email protected] or by text or cellphone at 716.983.7800. For more information and links to reference material click here:

DISCLAIMER – This blog is not intended to be legal advice nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. It is not possible to anticipate every situation. Laws and regulations vary from one area to another and federal, state or local laws may apply. Anyone seeking legal advice should contact an attorney in their area of the country familiar with criminal and First Amendment Law.

Posted in Access, ACLU v Alvarez, Assault on Photographers, broadcasting, Cameras, cell phone cameras, Chicago, Chicago Police, Democratic National Convention, Department of Justice, Exigent Circumstances, First Amendment, First Amendment rights, FL, Florida, Fourth Amendment, Fourth Amendment rights, Glik v Cunniffe, Illinois, Illinois Eavesdropping Law, National Press Photographers Association, NC, News Photography, Newsgathering, NPPA, photographers, Photographers' Rights, photojournalism, Police, Recording, Recording Police, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, U.S. Secret Service, video cameras | No Comments »

Right to Record–Recording in Public Meetings is a Right in Arkansas

April 3rd, 2012 by Alicia Calzada and tagged , , , , , , , ,

The Attorney General in Arkansas issued an opinion letter ruling on Monday confirming that a city council in the state did not have the right to ban video recordings of public meetings.

The Associated Press is reporting that the White River Current newspaper sought an official opinion from the AG’s office after the local city council in Calico Rock banned recordings from its meetings. The newspaper had posted council meeting videos on YouTube.

Three questions were posed to the AG, including

1) whether or not the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act granted citizens a right to make a video recording of a public meeting of elected officials?

A: Yes.

2) whether a claim that recording is “disruptive” because a council member is uncomfortable being recorded, sufficient reason to ban recording.

A: No.

3) whether or not the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grants citizens the right to record public officials in performance of their duties.

A: No- the First Amendment does not grant peopel the right to make a tape recording of a public meeting.

In an eleven page opinion, the AG said, in summary:

When one reads the FOIA broadly to foster greater openness and more disclosure—as we are required to do—I believe there are good grounds to conclude that our FOIA affords persons the right to videotape a public meeting. According to my research, this also accords with the law in the overwhelming majority of states. But, in response to your second question, the right to videotape a public meeting is subject to the public body’s reasonable regulation. While such regulation cannot ban videotaping, the regulation can ensure that the activity is done in a manner that does not disrupt the meeting. In my view, the mere fact that a member of the public body is uncomfortable being filmed is not a sufficient reason to ban the videotaping. When it comes to videotaping public meetings, the FOIA appears to give greater rights than does the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because—in response to your third question—the amendment does not give people a right to videotape public proceedings.

The opinion is loaded with interesting case law and citations to various state FOI decisions. See in particular footnotes on page 3, for an analysis of various states and the right to record public meetings, with citations to rules expressly permitting recording in Indiana, South Carolina and Kentucky. The opinion can be found at this link.

 

Posted in Access, blogging, broadcasting, First Amendment, News Photography, Newsgathering, photographers, Photographers' Rights, photojournalism, Public Forum, Public Photography, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy, Recording, Regulations limiting photography | No Comments »

NPPA FIles Comments in Support of H.B. 3944 Amending the Criminal Provisions of the Illinois Wiretap Law

February 6th, 2012 by Mickey Osterreicher

The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) has submitted comments to the Illinois General Assembly in support of House Bill 3944. Spoinsored by Rep. Elaine Nekritz, the proposed legislation (among other things) “amends the Illinois Criminal Code and exempts from an eavesdropping violation the recording of a peace officer who is performing a public duty in a public place and speaking at a volume audible to the unassisted human ear.” 

The current Illinois Wiretap Law makes it a felony (with a penalty of up to 15 years in jail) to audio record a police officer in public without consent regardless of whether a reasonable expectation of privacy exisited.

The NPPA is extremely concerned that the criminal penalties under the Illinois Eavesdropping Act, 720 ILCS 5/14 (“the Act”), as applied to the audio recording of police officers, has created a chilling effect upon free speech and a free press, particularly for photojournalists, who by the very nature of their profession must operate on the front lines of news, in the middle of sometimes highly charged situations.

NPPA joined in the amicus curiae brief in ACLU v. Alvarez, submitted by news organizations in support of the ACLU position seeking a declaratory judgment and a preliminary injunction against the application of the Act because it violates the First Amendment. Regardless of the Seventh Circuit decision in that case, which in any event may likely be appealed, NPPA is deeply concerned that daily coverage of news events, Occupy Chicago protests and the upcoming G-8 Summit may put those seeking to record these important matters of public concern at risk because of the continued enforcement of the Act. It especially disconcerting for us to think that foreign journalists covering the Summit meeting may be subject to arrest and prosecution for doing something they understandably believe to be a Constitutionally protected right throughout the United States.

In a time of technology and terrorism, citizens and photojournalists throughout the world have risked, and in some cases given their lives, to provide visual proof of governmental activities. Sadly, what is viewed as heroic abroad is often considered as suspect or criminal at home. It is therefore incumbent upon the 97th General Assembly of the State of Illinois to immediately enact H.B. 3944.

Posted in Access, broadcasting, Cameras, cell phone cameras, Chicago, Chicago Police, confiscated, DOJ, First Amendment, First Amendment rights, Fourth Amendment, Fourth Amendment rights, G-8 Summit, H.B. 3944, Illinois, Illinois General Assemby, National Press Photographers Association, News Photography, Newsgathering, NPPA, Photographers' Rights, photojournalism, Police, Public Photography, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy, Recording Police, Regulations limiting photography, Search and Seizure, Suspicious Activity, Terrorism, video cameras, Wiretap Law | No Comments »

Illinois Supreme Court to Allow Trial Courts to “Experiment” with Courtroom Cameras

January 23rd, 2012 by Mickey Osterreicher and tagged , ,

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, the Illinois Supreme Court will begin to permit cameras in trial courts on an experimental basis in the state’s 23 circuits.

“The Supreme Court plans an announcement [Tuesday] dealing with cameras in the courtroom on an experimental basis,” said Joseph Tybor, a spokesman for the state’s high court.

Cameras in the Courtroom at the trial court level has been a high priority for Illinois Chief Justice Thomas Kilbride, who has been a staunch advocate on behalf of this issue.

Coverage of the state’s appellate courts and the Supreme Court has been allowed since 1983, but up until now cameras  have been banned at the trial court level.

Posted in Access, broadcasting, Cameras, Cameras in the Courtroom, First Amendment, First Amendment rights, Illinois, News Photography, Newsgathering, photographers, Photographers' Rights, photojournalism | No Comments »

« Previous Entries