Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Journalists Face Jail Time After Reporting on North Dakota Pipeline Protest (techcrunch.com)

Posted by msmash on from the topsy-turvy-world dept.

Investigative reporter and co-founder of Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman, is now facing riot charges in the state of North Dakota after her report on a Native American-led pipeline protest there went viral on Facebook. From a TechCrunch report:Democracy Now! issued a statement about the new charges against Goodman late Saturday. Goodman's story, posted to Facebook on September 4th, has been viewed more than 14 million times on the social media platform, Democracy Now! said, and was picked up by mainstream media outlets and networks including CBS, NBC, NPR, CNN, MSNBC and The Huffington Post. Additionally, documentary filmmaker Deia Schlosberg, is facing felony and conspiracy charges that could carry a 45-year sentence for filming at the protest, IndieWire reports.

9 of 357 comments (clear)

  1. Good luck by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know - I'm not even really against the pipeline. IMHO the protesters are over blowing the concerns and construction should have been going ahead.

    THAT SAID - the way the authorities have been treating the protesters is absolutely mind boggling. They have a right to protest - and people have a right to film it. Trumping up "riot" charges because you don't like what they're saying is not just sour grapes - it's unconstitutional.

    I'm not even sure about my position on the pipeline itself anymore, but everyone involved in the handling of the protests should be either voted out/recalled if elected, or fired if not elected.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    1. Re:Good luck by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was in favor of the pipeline until this all started happening. Now? Fuck 'em: Hope they lose their goddamn shirts. Because their investment isn't worth more than the first amendment right to protest, and the first amendment right to report.

      --
      Who did what now?
    2. Re:Good luck by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 5, Insightful

      THAT SAID - the way the authorities have been treating the protesters is absolutely mind boggling. They have a right to protest - and people have a right to film it.

      They do not have a right to protest on private land. They don't have the right to obstruct construction crews with their protest. They certainly don't have the right to claim to be about "Democracy Now" based on the opinion of a few thousand (?) unelected protesters to overrule the US Congress and the State of North Dakota (plus a Federal Court and the Army Corps of Engineers).

      They certainly definitely don't have the right to break into pipeline control systems and start turning valves.

      I don't support punitive jail sentences for any of them, but at the same time I don't support the idea that if you have enough people, you can obstruct things you don't approve of (Planned Parenthood?!) and then hide behind the First Amendment. You have the freedom to express yourself, but no one has to listen or give a shit.

  2. She's not charged for being a journalist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    She's charged for taking part in the riot - the evidence? She filmed herself trespassing on private property along with the rioters, filmed it, then turned around and claimed she's immune because she's a journalist.

  3. Re:Hmm... by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In that part of the country they have laws intended to suppress reporting of negative things about agribusiness and such. The reporter might have run afoul of one of those.

    Whatever the excuse, hopefully it will get bitch slapped by the Supremes and struck down.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  4. Re:Hmm... by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In that part of the country they have laws intended to suppress reporting of negative things about agribusiness and such. The reporter might have run afoul of one of those.

    Whatever the excuse, hopefully it will get bitch slapped by the Supremes and struck down.

    It appears that the protesters were attempting to shut down pipeline pumping stations, and the charges against (at least in the filmaker's case) are "conspiracy to 'X'" type charges where the actual protesters were charged with "committing 'X'" type charges outright.

    It appears that the government's position in practice is that if a journalist suspects the subjects he is reporting on may commit a crime, the journalist is obligated to report them to authorities or face conspiracy charges.

    Hope everyone enjoyed that "freedom of the press" stuff while it lasted. Remember, a vote for anything other than (D) or (R) is a wasted vote!

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  5. Re:Hmm... by NatasRevol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yep. That's exactly what China says when they shut up reporters too.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  6. Re:Hmm... by bmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This AG needs to be smacked with a civil rights violation charge and lawsuit.

    They first charged Amy Goodman with criminal trespass. The AG had to drop the charge, because it was laughably bogus, as I will demonstrate below.

    This is how dumb this AG is:

    1. The Native Americans wanted her there.
    2. It's their land.
    3. JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN EASEMENT DOESN'T MEAN YOU OWN THE FUCKING LAND. If you want to own the land under a pipeline, fucking /buy it/ instead of going the cheap route and getting easements.

    Ergo, there was no fucking trespass, let alone /criminal/ trespass.

    There are no charges for assault with a deadly weapon against the "security" idiots for using /dogs/ against the protesters.

    This AG doesn't even fucking understand simple trespass. Where did he get his law degree? From a Cracker Jack box?

    And now he "doesn't consider her a journalist" because he doesn't like her attitude. THAT DOES NOT NULLIFY AMY GOODMAN'S FUCKING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, YOU IDIOT.

    Amy Goodman got $100k out of the last time her civil rights were violated. She should go after the AG /personally/.

    --
    BMO

  7. Re:Hmm... by lgw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A landlord can commit trespass on property rented or leased to another in many states. Just because you own the property doesn't make you immune to trespass charges. The fact that someone vaguely associated with you owns the property in no way protects your from trespass charges.

    The first amendment gives you no right to trespass, riot, cause damage, or assemble in any way other than "peaceably".

    Journalists are just people. People have first amendment rights. Journalists are not nobility, not aristocrats, no matter how much they like to image that. They have the same rights as anyone else, no special privilege.

    And the rights of an ordinary person should be enough, assuming she wasn't actually committing crimes.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.