Slashdot Mirror
Police Department Charging TV News Network $36,000 For Body Cam Footage (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader writes with news that the NYPD charged a local television station $36k to view police body camera footage. Ars reports: "As body cams continue to flourish in police departments across the nation, an ongoing debate has ensued about how much, if any, of that footage should be made public under state open-access laws. An overlooked twist to that debate, however, has now become front and center: How much should the public have to pay for the footage if the police agree to release it? News network NY1, a Time Warner Cable News operation, was billed $36,000 by the NYPD for roughly 190 hours of footage it requested under the state's Freedom of Information Law (FOIL). Now the network is suing (PDF) the police department in New York state court, complaining that the price tag is too steep. The network said the bill runs 'counter to both the public policy of openness underlying FOIL, as well as the purported transparency supposedly fostered by the BWC (body worn camera) program itself.'"
How many workers does it take to do this?
As many as it takes to discourage requests from the citizens.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Thus, access to the videos, at rate not restrictive enough to prevent its distribution, is a requirement fair play cannot do without.
If a viewing tax restricts the footage from being released, then cameras are worthless except to protect the innocent law enforcement officers.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Go ahead and charge them. The media preys upon the misery of others and wants a direct free live feed with 24/7 coverage of cops hassling the public. I can't count the amount of times some traffic cop has pulled me over, given me a full field sobriety test plus breathalyzer despite not having had a drop to drink, and continued to harass me before letting me go. Now imagine I was a public official or celebrity (even worse imagine if I was a republican in a liberal-leaning city) and the TV station had full access to the cop's body cam footage. Despite my innocence it would be plastered ALL OVER TABLOIDS and other sleazy outlets as only the media could to slant and paint it in a bad light.
No thanks. You charge them out the wazoo NYCPD. Good on you for making journalists actually have to hunt down stories and do their jobs.
Just exactly how can first-person video of what a cop sees cost someone their life if revealed?
Seriously? Because - and this is easier to stomach once you get away from the view that ALL police are corrupt bastards(*) - police are involved in dealing with vulnerables victims as much as they are involved dealing with nasty perps and innocent bystanders. For example, a potential victim of domestic abuse who has invited the police in when his/her partner is out does not want an excerpt of the interview released on prime time news. An undercover cop involved in monitoring a people trafficking operation (idk if that's a big thing in the US, but it's certainly a SIGNIFICANT problem in Europe, attracting some of the most evil individuals) does not want to be shown interacting with a uniformed officer, because someone whose business is to make slaves of others does not have much regard for human life.
(*) Some are. So are some computer programmers. So are some bankers. So are some charity workers. Even among politicians, you find the worst and the best (right up to President, who is taking one of the statistically greatest risks a person can take in assuming office). Turns out everyone's human.