Guantanamo, smuggle secrets, Snowden

1 November 2014 Back in the days, someone asked if I release incriminating images and information about abuse in a Cuban prison. Back in the days, we did not have super encryption to protect the journalists or identity of another person leaking the information. Still today, I do not understand the technology needed to protect the whistle blower or myself from our governments view on journalism crime. Although, I must insert here, most of the information that whistle blowers decide to "leak out" are things that we the taxpayers and citizens of our world should know. You know, to help fight corruptions and be the "good" people and expose the "bad" As a good journalist, I felt that I needed to know my whistle blowers and verify his/her and information before I would write anything up and "leak" that information to major media outlets. Yet, there was nothing to protect us...at that time, at least that I was aware of. As a response, the person asked me again if I could help but I needed to meet him/her and see what they had. I did not have any protection to offer and as a result the person just sort of disappeared. A few months later, the images were released all over the world. Of course I thought to myself, dang...I could have been famous from that what did I do wrong? Yet, I was scared to move forward without protection, I knew what the government was capable of. If this happened to me, and I must insert I was more "visible" in those days during the pre-independent journalism phase of journalism which made me a person that someone like that would approach. What is it like for the independent journalist today? How do we learn to release information that we feel the public should know without having to move to another country and risk going to jail? I stumbled onto this great article: ED SNOWDEN TAUGHT ME TO SMUGGLE SECRETS PAST INCREDIBLE DANGER. NOW I TEACH YOU. Please read, if you are interested in this information

Photojournalists as Terrorists in the U.S.A.

Susan Brannon
24 September 2012


There has been a lot of talk lately regarding our freedom of expression and speech in the world of photojournalism.  Last year when the Occupy movement started many journalists were reported as being arrested, some have been arrested four times.  It is our job as photojournalists to tell the story and it our job as journalists to let the world know and judge for themselves what perspective they want to take.

It is becoming more and more difficult to tell the news through the world of images.  The police hit you on the head with their batons, they block your lens they tell you to go away or they simply drag you into the back of a van for arrest.  They do not like images being taken of some of the abuses that occurs during the protests because it is proof of their uncivil behavior.  Are we as journalists supposed to tell lies through our lens?  I don't think so and that is not what journalism is all about.  Or, shall I say that is not what we are supposed to stand for ethically.

The last thing that I want to do when catching "action" and news is to ask the policemen to stand and shake the hands of a protester with a smile on his face for the camera.  That is not the reality that I hear and read about.

For me as a photojournalist, this is scary and very much so.  Not in terms of my own physical safety but in terms of our country becoming fascist in the direction of Hitler or Mussolini or even the current Berlusconi who controls almost all of the Italian media.  This is the police state that people are talking about or have been talking about in the years past.  This is not a conspiracy, this is a reality. Our country was founded on these simple freedoms, we even had street corners where people could stand and voice their opinions to those who were willing to listen.

This is a larger part of the anti-terrorist concept taken to the extreme. Democracy is denied these days.  We need to be careful of "fear", because when there is "fear" then we change our free ways.  After 9/11 it gave an excuse to change the laws.  Photographer Chris Miller who has been arrested three times said, "They’re recording us, they don’t want us recording them,” said Miller. “They really want to put a scare factor into us,” he added.

These photographers even ask if they are using their images to send to the Al Qaeda. "NPPA  responds to the LAPD special order that equates photography with criminal activity" reports that "The LAPD recently issued guidelines instructing their officers on “behavior/activity that may reveal a nexus to foreign or domestic terrorism.” Such behavior listed includes:

“Taking pictures or videos of facilities/buildings, infrastructures, or protected sites in a manner that would arouse suspicion in a reasonable person.  Examples include taking pictures or videos of ingress/egress, delivery locations, personnel performing security functions (e.g., patrol, badge/vehicle checking), security-related equipment (e.g., perimeter fencing, security cameras), etc”

The NPPA responded, "“Photography is protected by the First Amendment, subject only to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions. Unfortunately the reliance on policies such as the LAPD’s as the basis for law enforcement officers to question, detain and interfere with lawful activities by photographers under the guise of preventing terrorist activities has become a daily occurrence.”

On the "Lens Blog with the NY Times" in their article titled, "Criminalizing Photography" Through an interview with Mickey H. Osterreicher with the NPPA he says, "It’s not just news photographers who should be concerned with this. I think every citizen should be concerned. Tourists taking pictures are being told by police, security guards and sometimes other citizens, “Sorry, you can’t take a picture here.” When asked why, they say, “Well, don’t you remember 9/11?”

I remember it quite well, but what does that have do to with taking a picture in public? It seems like the war on terrorism has somehow morphed into an assault on photography."

The advise that I would give is to be polite, ask for permission to cross that "crime line" get to know your local police officers and don't argue. Just walk away and try to see if you can get that "breaking story" from a different angle.

Today there is a bombardment with citizen journalists, using their camera phones as the source.  In Libya or Syria the camera phone is useful to getting the news out and even then they are risking their lives.  The problem is that today, the photojournalists are also risking their lives but in a different way, they risk getting arrested or even beaten up.

Every day a photojournalist is getting arrested in America and that is something that all of us should be having a problem with.  Photographers today are being charged with disorderly conduct, trespassing and the obstruction of governmental administration for doing their job.  Most of the time, the charges get dropped but in the meantime the photographer did not get the news.

The point is that if you are on public property, you have every right to take a picture.  Of course there are differences between taking photographs and the use of the photograph.  Unfortunately, it is the press that is not having as much "free will" with their image taking than the normal John Doe who is photographing a local fire.  It is the press that will be told no and the John Doe can continue. Even then, it is the police in many cities that want to decide what images the photographer can use.  They want to serve and protect by deciding what images to use.  It is not their job and as Osterreicher said in his interview, "Just as a news photographer's job isn't to direct traffic, or collect evidence at a scene…"

Legally, here are some of the sited cases:

Channel 10, Inc v. Gunnarson, 337 F. Supp. 634 (D. Minn. 1972)
"… employees of the news media have a right to be in public places and on public property to gather information, photographically or otherwise."


Schnell v. City of Chi., 407 F.2d 1084, 1085 (7th Cir. 1969)
(reversing dismissal for failure to state a claim of suit claiming police interference with news reporters and photographers’ “constitutional right to gather and report news, and to photograph news events” under the First Amendment (internal quotation mark omitted)


Cape Publications, Inc. v. Bridges, 423 So.2d 426, Fla.App. 5 Dist.,1982.
"the right of privacy does not necessarily protect a person against the publication of his name or photograph in connection with the dissemination of legitimate news
items or other matters of public interest."

"...where one becomes an actor in an occurrence of public interest, it is not an invasion of her right to privacy to publish her photograph with an account of such occurrence. Just because the story and the photograph may be embarrassing or distressful to the plaintiff does not mean the newspaper cannot publish what is otherwise newsworthy."

CISPA and Journalism

18 April 2012
This is not about photography, per se..but the CISPA bill will effect us all and if any of you out there want to be a photojournalist then your ability to "report" will become more and more limited.  You will loose your "freedom" to create documentary photography stories that you may want to create.  Your work will become limited.  I remember when I was working during the Bush administration, covering the conflict in the Middle East, I could not publish many realities in American news outlets.  We could not publish images of American soldier coffins with flags,  no one would purchase photo stories about the defense contractors in Iraq, or the gas lines.  My images and stories were published all over the world, except for in America.  I became black listed for such behind the scene stories.  I was relieved when Obama took office, and I would have the ability to tell the American people and survive, behind the scene stories once again.  Well folks, CISPA will change all that, and more forever...and it could get much worse.
The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act is a bill that would allow companies doing business in the US to collect records of American citizens online activities, worldwide.  This includes all American journalists, photographers, investigative journalists, news agencies, associations, You Tube and bloggers.  This is a bill in my opinion, is very serious indeed. 

It was developed to help stop "cybersecurity threats" and for "cybersecurity purposes"  The bill is weak in definition, and it does not narrow the categories that the companies are to report to the American government.  This leaves the door open to any kind of interpretation, censor any speech that a company believes could "downgrade the network."  It is supposed to "protect theft or misappropriation of private or government information."  This includes intellectual property.  This gives a powerful weapon to close websites that provide important information to the American public and to the world.  The New York Times, could face problems with this bill because they published information from WikiLeaks.  They could censor international sites from American view who has information that the government does not want the American people to know about.

It reminds me of the European history pre-WWII, or the American Japanese scare and arrests on American soil.  I don't want to be forced to "wear a star" so others can identity me as a "cyber terrorist", or a "propaganda terrorists", (a new term that I read about lately, more on that later) and an American enemy, because I am writing this article.  As far as I am concerned this is the next step towards Fascism, by controlling the people, controlling the media and inserting fear that you may just get arrested the next time you cross over into American borders. 

How does the CISPA effect journalists? 
The bill disregards our Fourth Amendment rights as they apply to journalists and documentary filmmakers working on subject matter related to US military operations, foreign policy and other subjects that the Homeland Security finds offensive. 

Wait, what does homeland security have to do with CISPA the "internet eye in the sky?"  It has everything to do with it, when a person writes "keywords" that are a concern to American homeland security, that person is added to a "Homeland Security watch list" and if that person is researching, investigating, photographing, filmmaking on any of these subjects, then they will be added onto this list.  When someone is on the list, then the government, Homeland Security will have the right to arrest, question, or detain that person without any explanation, rights to make a phone call, for any amount of time and without any legal representation.  Now that is a hard call and a scary one.

The fourth amendment reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Is not the passing of CISPA creating the legal ability for the government (what ever branch) to follow citizens actions, opinions, online published papers, published articles, images, or emails and conversations using the written word or even voiced such as on Skype or Google, against the fourth amendment?  This action will Kill the Forth Amendment. 

In the end, it boils down to who is reading the key words and what kind of mood they are in that day if they report you or not. If anyone in the corporation feels that the citizen in this case, journalist, is approaching information that concerns the said "national interest, sensitive, secret or protected from disclosure then that information," journalist will be considered a "threat".  Remember it is the government or "homeland security" that can distinguish which materials are public or protected from disclosure not the companies.

CISPA puts the companies into the position of becoming "informers" with the promise of shielding them from any legal responsibility.  The government and these companies, (see supporters of CISPA list) tell the citizens that the law protects the populations and tech companies from cyber attacks.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers"

That freedom was suppressed in Germany by President Paul Von Hindenburg, as Adolf Hitler was coming into power.  Hitler suppressed press freedom through the Joseph Goebbels' Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda where which the government acted as a central point for all media, issuing orders as to what stories could or could not be told. In this way, important realities were kept from the citizens and the journalists did not have a choice to take action in fear of execution. 

This bill instills increased fear among the American people.  I always hear people say, "Well, I'm not doing anything wrong, they can do what they want.  I have nothing to hide."  Wait a minute, does this mean because you are a "good person" that you will watch our civil rights drift away?  What happens when you become really angry about what can most likely happen in America's future when our freedoms are really gone and you want to say something or do something about it, like create a petition?  If the CISPA bill passes, you will be faced with the fear regarding, your postings on Facebook, web searches, sending emails, writing blog posts, any communication online...for fear that someone could "come knocking" on your door.  This has already happened to over 50,000 American citizens, and some of them have quietly been deported.

If "they" don't like what you are doing, they will have the right to: shut you down, your website, your blog, your business, and your existence.

Reporters Without Borders put it this way, "The definition of potential threats is even broader. It targets ‘‘efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy” a system or network, the “theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information”.  CISPA in its current form is written in broad scope.  The information that the companies share is not narrow and limited.  Information sharing should be about increasing Internet users' security, not government surveillance.

Related Articles:
Stop the Cyber Intelligence Sharing Protection Act

CISPA Supporters List
True America: Where Lies Become the Truth
Procedures for handling Assemblies and Mass Demonstrations in D.C. 

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA)

18 April 2012
The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) would allow companies doing business in the US to collect exact records of all of our online activities and hand them over to the US government, without ever notifying us that we are being watched. No warrant, no legal cause and no due process required. To make matters worse, the bill provides the government and corporations with blanket immunity to protect them from being sued for violation of privacy and other illegal actions.

The bill’s supporters claim that consumer information will be protected, but the reality is that huge loopholes would make everything we do online fair game -- and nowadays, from banking to shopping, our private information is all stored on the Internet.

CISPA is being moved forward in Congress and will be voted upon in days. Let’s raise a massive outcry to stop corporations from giving the US a blank check to monitor our every move.

Right now, the US is poised to pass a new law that would permit US agents to spy on almost everything we do online. But we can stop them before the final vote.

Companies that we trust with our personal information, like Microsoft and Facebook, are key supporters of this bill that lets corporations share all user activity and content with US government agents without needing a warrant in the name of cyber-security -- nullifying privacy guarantees for almost everyone around the world, no matter where we live and surf online.

If enough of us speak out, we can stop companies that profit from our business from supporting cyber-spying. Sign the petition to these key net corporations now:

Click below to take action:

Avaaz

This year, we helped stop SOPA, PIPA and ACTA -- all dire threats to the Internet. Now, let’s block CISPA and end the US government attack on our Internet.
Related Articles:
CISPA Supporters List
 CISPA and Journalism
True America: Where Lies Become the Truth
Procedures for handling Assemblies and Mass Demonstrations in D.C. 

Protest of SOPA PIPP please click here to sign

Today Through The Lens joins with other sites in a virtual strike to protest two proposed laws in the United States, called SOPA and the PROTECT IP Act. On January 24th, the U.S. Senate will vote on the PROTECT IP Act to censor the Internet, despite opposition from the vast majority of Americans.
Join us to protect our rights to free speech, privacy, and prosperity.
http://americancensorship.org/