CITIZEN BEATEN FOR FILMING SPEAKING EVENT

[E.O.T.]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOkEjCTtWBM&feature=related

          so this guy is filming a speaking event by one of oregon's candidates for governor. love to see your responses to this.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOkEjCTtWBM&feature=related

          so this guy is filming a speaking event by one of oregon's candidates for governor. love to see your responses to this.

Which part of his first amendment rights is he invoking? Freedom of press?

If so, I think you have to register as a member of the press. I could be wrong about that, but I'm not sure if it's constitutionally protected.
THat said, since it is a public event, he should be allowed to film, and should press charges against the guy for assault.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

It's a public event on private property. I think he should have been allowed to film, but I'm not sure his 1st Amendment claim would stand up in court.

it's fucked up that the right to document reality is evaporating.
but isn't that why they make hidden cameras?

[E.O.T.]

THIS THING

         really does become a mess. the paper here has yet to print anything about it, not even in the editorials. and people are talking about it. there's so much that's f-d up about the incident itself. why this guy asserts his "first amendment rights" i'm not exactly certain, but the church ought to have called the proper authorities. i don't think it'd be legal for a bouncer to strike at a customer at a club or bar, in a similar situation.

I AM AMUSED

         by this chick's (not suspicious) article about the incident http://www.examiner.com/women-s-issues-in-portland-me/citizen-assaulted-for-filming-john-kitzhaber-is-a-big-fat-lie

         i really like how she calls the person with the camera an "activist" (in portland, that's equivalent to 'terrorist'). i wonder what her article would be about if that same activist were a woman, at a predominately white attended event. oh wait, then it would already be on national news.

         

[E.O.T.]

THE LEFT

          http://www.tsweekly.com/6387-right-wingers-stage-a-video-ambush-in-portland.html

          has hilariously taken the position that's it's o.k. because the person filming is associated with (regardless that this fact was unknown at the time of the event) a right wing publisher.

          Flash forward to Thursday, when Kitzhaber was speaking at Emmanuel Temple Church in Portland. Two as-yet-unidentified people – described by Oregonian political blogger Jeff Mapes as "video activists" – showed up with cameras, and a couple of campaign volunteers asked one of the cameramen to stop. He refused, insisting it was his "First Amendment right" to record the speech. Eventually one volunteer, James Posey, got exasperated and ended up pushing the camera into the guy's face.

The next day the video appeared on Breitbart.tv with the title: "Citizen Assaulted for Filming John Kitzhaber Event." At the end of it, the cameraman is shown with a small cut on the bridge of his nose.

(Check out the comments below the video and you'll see the fact that the cameraman was white and the guy who hit him was black was not lost on Breitbart's audience.)

The video also appears on another Breitbart site under the headline: "Dems Gone Wild: Citizen Assaulted for Filming John Kitzhaber Event." The byline on the piece – although it's not clear whether he was one of the cameramen – is that of James O'Keefe, a 25-year-old right-wing operative who describes himself as an "investigative journalist and filmmaker."

          so, next time you get "exasperated" with someone, it's now o.k. to strike at them.          ?
         

[E.O.T.]

HERE

          http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2010/09/video_of_altercation_at_kitzha/2664/comments.html

          are responses posted at "oregon live" - an online news journal.

[E.O.T.]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOkEjCTtWBM&feature=related

          so this guy is filming a speaking event by one of oregon's candidates for governor. love to see your responses to this.

Which part of his first amendment rights is he invoking? Freedom of press?

If so, I think you have to register as a member of the press. I could be wrong about that, but I'm not sure if it's constitutionally protected.
THat said, since it is a public event, he should be allowed to film, and should press charges against the guy for assault.

O.K.

          so it seems from everything i've read, that this 'filmer' guy is a journalist of some sort, but no, he does not make that clear during the time of this incident. that we can tell from the video, anyway.

[Phox]

Aside from the part that quotes him a describing himself as one, is there any corroborative evidence that he is a professional journalist?

[E.O.T.]

Aside from the part that quotes him a describing himself as one, is there any corroborative evidence that he is a professional journalist?

I DON'T CATCH THAT

          anywhere during the tape(?) - but whether or not this person is a journalist becomes irrelevant. it's not that big of an event, actually quite small as you can see from the footage. people just sit on their hands during the episode(!) everyone in the room had to see the violence taking place. and kitzhaber doesn't even pause?

OVERALL

          i'm kinda blown away that all the online jabber covering this has not resulted in some print!

BUT, THEN AGAIN,

          the 'oregonian' recently ran an article dismissing "9/11 was an inside job" theories as a view held only by uninformed and radical muslims. because that's the news.

[Phox]

Aside from the part that quotes him a describing himself as one, is there any corroborative evidence that he is a professional journalist?

I DON'T CATCH THAT

          anywhere during the tape(?) - but whether or not this person is a journalist becomes irrelevant. it's not that big of an event, actually quite small as you can see from the footage. people just sit on their hands during the episode(!) everyone in the room had to see the violence taking place. and kitzhaber doesn't even pause?

OVERALL

          i'm kinda blown away that all the online jabber covering this has not resulted in some print!

BUT, THEN AGAIN,

          the 'oregonian' recently ran an article dismissing "9/11 was an inside job" theories as a view held only by uninformed and radical muslims. because that's the news.

I meant in the part of the article you quoted.

The video also appears on another Breitbart site under the headline: "Dems Gone Wild: Citizen Assaulted for Filming John Kitzhaber Event." The byline on the piece – although it's not clear whether he was one of the cameramen – is that of James O'Keefe, a 25-year-old right-wing operative who describes himself as an "investigative journalist and filmmaker."

I agree that it doesn't matter in the sense that SOMEONE should have done something. But as a future attorney, I like to see if people's claims would hold up in a court of law. So... unless he is a professional journalist, I don't think his First Amendment claim will.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Aside from the part that quotes him a describing himself as one, is there any corroborative evidence that he is a professional journalist?

I DON'T CATCH THAT

          anywhere during the tape(?) - but whether or not this person is a journalist becomes irrelevant. it's not that big of an event, actually quite small as you can see from the footage. people just sit on their hands during the episode(!) everyone in the room had to see the violence taking place. and kitzhaber doesn't even pause?

OVERALL

          i'm kinda blown away that all the online jabber covering this has not resulted in some print!

BUT, THEN AGAIN,

          the 'oregonian' recently ran an article dismissing "9/11 was an inside job" theories as a view held only by uninformed and radical muslims. because that's the news.

I meant in the part of the article you quoted.

The video also appears on another Breitbart site under the headline: "Dems Gone Wild: Citizen Assaulted for Filming John Kitzhaber Event." The byline on the piece – although it's not clear whether he was one of the cameramen – is that of James O'Keefe, a 25-year-old right-wing operative who describes himself as an "investigative journalist and filmmaker."

I agree that it doesn't matter in the sense that SOMEONE should have done something. But as a future attorney, I like to see if people's claims would hold up in a court of law. So... unless he is a professional journalist, I don't think his First Amendment claim will.

Personally I think the idea that one has to be a "professional journalist" in order to document events is a little insulting. Who gets to decide who is "professional" enough? I think there is a legitimate restriction on his 1st Amendment rights in this case, since it is private property, even if the public was invited. Generally speaking, when you invite the public, it means the public is free to attend the event, but not necessarily free to redistribute whatever they receive there. In a privately owned establishment, house rules trump the Constitution (to a point) because nobody is forcing the guy to attend in the first place.

But mainly, yeah, to say only the "professional press" has a right to Freedom of the Press is disgusting, imho.

[Phox]

Aside from the part that quotes him a describing himself as one, is there any corroborative evidence that he is a professional journalist?

I DON'T CATCH THAT

          anywhere during the tape(?) - but whether or not this person is a journalist becomes irrelevant. it's not that big of an event, actually quite small as you can see from the footage. people just sit on their hands during the episode(!) everyone in the room had to see the violence taking place. and kitzhaber doesn't even pause?

OVERALL

          i'm kinda blown away that all the online jabber covering this has not resulted in some print!

BUT, THEN AGAIN,

          the 'oregonian' recently ran an article dismissing "9/11 was an inside job" theories as a view held only by uninformed and radical muslims. because that's the news.

I meant in the part of the article you quoted.

The video also appears on another Breitbart site under the headline: "Dems Gone Wild: Citizen Assaulted for Filming John Kitzhaber Event." The byline on the piece – although it's not clear whether he was one of the cameramen – is that of James O'Keefe, a 25-year-old right-wing operative who describes himself as an "investigative journalist and filmmaker."

I agree that it doesn't matter in the sense that SOMEONE should have done something. But as a future attorney, I like to see if people's claims would hold up in a court of law. So... unless he is a professional journalist, I don't think his First Amendment claim will.

Personally I think the idea that one has to be a "professional journalist" in order to document events is a little insulting. Who gets to decide who is "professional" enough? I think there is a legitimate restriction on his 1st Amendment rights in this case, since it is private property, even if the public was invited. Generally speaking, when you invite the public, it means the public is free to attend the event, but not necessarily free to redistribute whatever they receive there. In a privately owned establishment, house rules trump the Constitution (to a point) because nobody is forcing the guy to attend in the first place.

But mainly, yeah, to say only the "professional press" has a right to Freedom of the Press is disgusting, imho.

Completely agree. But, on the other hand, there is the possibility that he doesn't/didn't want the footage for the purpose of actual journalism either, but might have used it for partisan mudslinging ("professional" journalists do that all the time, but that doesn't make it ok, it just means the court will probably uphold their claim to free press). Second, it's violation of privacy to film anything without permission, public event or not, because it is private property.  And of course, the courts get to decide who freedom of press applies to. Stupid? Yes, but then, I don't think the writers of the first amendment had to worry about every one and their cousin having access to a medium which allowed them to make worldwide publications in seconds, either.

[E.O.T.]

ALL GREAT POINTS,

          but still. struck at and then punched with the camera. way out of line.
          no print.
          the liberal bloggers are basically blaming the victim and justifying the guy hitting him.

HAS THE CHURCH

          made a public apology for this? hell no!

HOW DIFFERENT

          would media reaction be if this occurred at a 'tea bagger' event? image & soundbite blitzkrieg? probably guaranteed. especially in portland. there'd be a riot outside that church and hundreds of crusty punks on tall bikes outside the trade center building downtown(yaawwn).

AND KITZHABER?

          keeping his political hands clean and hasn't said a word. if that guy had been filming from his bicycle when this happened, our current (shitfuck) mayor would be holding press conferences and organizing benefits

[Phox]

ALL GREAT POINTS,

          but still. struck at and then punched with the camera. way out of line.
          no print.
          the liberal bloggers are basically blaming the victim and justifying the guy hitting him.

HAS THE CHURCH

          made a public apology for this? hell no!

HOW DIFFERENT

          would media reaction be if this occurred at a 'tea bagger' event? image & soundbite blitzkrieg? probably guaranteed. especially in portland. there'd be a riot outside that church and hundreds of crusty punks on tall bikes outside the trade center building downtown(yaawwn).

AND KITZHABER?

          keeping his political hands clean and hasn't said a word. if that guy had been filming from his bicycle when this happened, our current (shitfuck) mayor would be holding press conferences and organizing benefits

The silence of the media is rather disturbing, and there is no justification for the violence. To be honest, political  bloggers of any stripe are generally idiotic sheep that follow the faux ideologies that their masters tell them to, so their attempts at justification are neither surprising nor relevant. There is so much crap wrong with the whole scenario that it's not even worth discussing. It's goddamn ridiculous.  But, what can be done? Video's up. Bloggers are talking about it, at least. If the story doesn't get picked up in the media (and likely won't at this point), then it's another journalistic crime committed by our so-called information sources. And I'm from Illinois. Politicians are universally corrupt, ethically bankrupt liars and hypocrites here. So, not surprised by the lack of response by the politicians to the situation.

[Jasper]

Has the ACLU reacted?

Some objective justice is well in order here.