Ryan Vizzions' Iconic Standing Rock Photograph Featured in The Daly Climate Article on Greenpeace Verdict

 

Credit

Ryan Vizzions: "Defend The Sacred": Standing Rock, Cannon Ball, North Dakota, 2016

Via The Daily Climate

March 20, 2025

Greenpeace faces massive financial blow in pipeline lawsuit

EHN Curators


Greenpeace has been ordered to pay $667 million to the company behind the Dakota Access Pipeline after a North Dakota jury found the environmental group defamed the company, a verdict that could have sweeping consequences for advocacy and free speech.

Anna Phillips reports for The Washington Post.

In short:The lawsuit stemmed from Greenpeace’s involvement in protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline, where Energy Transfer accused the group of inciting violence and damaging its reputation. Greenpeace denies these claims and plans to appeal.

Environmentalists warn the ruling could stifle activism, making groups wary of challenging fossil fuel projects. Experts say it sends a chilling message to climate protests that disrupt infrastructure.
The case is seen as part of a broader trend of corporations using strategic lawsuits (SLAPPs) to silence critics. Unlike more than 30 other states, North Dakota lacks laws discouraging such lawsuits.

Key quote:

“We should all be concerned about the future of the First Amendment, and lawsuits like this aimed at destroying our rights to peaceful protest and free speech.”

— Deepa Padmanabha, senior legal counsel for Greenpeace USA

Why this matters:

Beyond the courtroom, the stakes are high. This case isn’t just about Greenpeace — it’s about the future of environmental protest in an era of escalating climate crisis. If the ruling stands, the next time a pipeline spills or a fossil fuel project threatens communities, who will dare to sound the alarm?

Read more:Fossil fuel companies ramp up lawsuits to silence climate activists in Europe
Governments and corporations are intensifying pressure on environmental defenders
Sacred Water: Environmental justice in Indian Country

More in The New York Times

What happens when a city silences a newspaper?

 Via Editor & Publisher

What happens when a city silences a newspaper? An inside look at the Clarksdale censorship case

In a shocking move that has sent ripples through the journalism and legal communities, a Mississippi judge ordered The Clarksdale Press Register to remove an editorial from its website. The piece, which criticized the lack of transparency surrounding a proposed tax initiative, was deemed defamatory by the city’s legal team — leading to an unprecedented ruling that effectively silenced the newspaper. The case raises serious First Amendment concerns, drawing national attention from press freedom advocates who warn of its dangerous implications.

In a recent episode of E&P Reports, E&P Magazine Publisher Mike Blinder sat down with The Clarksdale Press Register owner Wyatt Emmerich and Freedom of the Press Foundation Director of Advocacy Seth Stern to examine the case and its broader impact. They explored what this ruling means for press freedom, the precedent it could set, and why small newspapers must be vigilant in the face of government overreach. --click for full article

UPDATE February 25, 2025: Mississippi city drops lawsuit over newspaper editorial that judge ordered removed

 Mississippi city dropped its lawsuit Monday against a newspaper that had its editorial criticizing local leaders removed by a judge in a case that sparked widespread outrage from First Amendment advocates.

“The press and all people in the United States have the right to choose their own words and not be retaliated against by the government”

 Via Associated Press

February 21, 2025

The Associated Press sued three Trump administration officials Friday over access to presidential events, citing freedom of speech in asking a federal judge to stop the 10-day blocking of its journalists.

The lawsuit was filed Friday afternoon in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.

The AP says its case is about an unconstitutional effort by the White House to control speech — in this case refusing to change its style from the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America,” as President Donald Trump did last month with an executive order.

“The press and all people in the United States have the right to choose their own words and not be retaliated against by the government,” the AP said in its lawsuit, which names White House Chief of Staff Susan Wiles, Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.

“This targeted attack on the AP’s editorial independence and ability to gather and report the news strikes at the very core of the First Amendment,” the news agency said. “This court should remedy it immediately.”

In stopping the AP from attending press events at the White House and Mar-a-Lago, or flying on Air Force One in the agency’s customary spot, the Trump team directly cited the AP’s decision not to fully follow the president’s renaming.

“We’re going to keep them out until such time as they agree that it’s the Gulf of America,” Trump said Tuesday.

This week, about 40 news organizations signed onto a letter organized by the White House Correspondents Association, urging the White House to reverse its policy against the AP.

Letter from FIRE, NCAC, and ACLU of Texas to Fort Worth Police Department, February 19, 2025 Regarding Seized Sally Mann Photos

 Via Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

February 19, 2025

Dear Chief Noakes:

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), the National Coalition Against
Censorship (NCAC), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas are deeply
concerned by the Fort Worth Police Department’s unconstitutional seizure and investigation
of artist Sally Mann’s photographs, which were on view at the Modern Art Museum of Fort
Worth.1 While some may find the images inappropriate, that does not strip them of the First
Amendment protection afforded to artistic expression. We therefore call on the Fort Worth
Police Department to uphold its binding obligations to defend the Constitution by ceasing its
investigation and returning the photographs.

--Click for full letter

AP reporter and photographer barred from Air Force One over ‘Gulf of Mexico’ terminology dispute

 Via Associated Press

February 14, 2025

The White House barred a credentialed Associated Press reporter and photographer from boarding the presidential airplane Friday for a weekend trip with Donald Trump, saying the news agency’s stance on how to refer to the Gulf of Mexico was to blame for the exclusion. It represented a significant escalation by the White House in a four-day dispute with the AP over access to the presidency.

The administration has blocked the AP from covering a handful of events at the White House this week, including a news conference with India’s leader and several times in the Oval Office. It’s all because the news outlet has not followed Trump’s lead in renaming the body of water, which lies partially outside U.S. territory, to the “Gulf of America.”

AP reporters and photographers travel with the president virtually everywhere as part of a press “pool” and have for decades. AP journalism serves millions of readers and thousands of news outlets around the world.

Journalists consider the administration’s move a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment — a governmental attempt to dictate what a news company publishes under threat of retribution. The Trump administration says the AP has no special right of access to events where space is limited, particularly given the news service’s “commitment to misinformation.”

AP calls that assertion entirely untrue.

“Freedom of speech is a pillar of American democracy and a core value of the American people. The White House has said it supports these principles,” AP spokeswoman Lauren Easton said Friday night. “The actions taken to restrict AP’s coverage of presidential events because of how we refer to a geographic location chip away at this important right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution for all Americans.”

The body of water in question has been called the Gulf of Mexico for hundreds of years. AP, whose influential stylebook is used by news outlets as an arbiter of language and usage, advised that because of its broad set of global customers, it would both refer to the body of water as the Gulf of Mexico and also reference Trump’s order changing the name to the Gulf of America within the United States.

At the same time, the AP switched style last month from Denali to Mount McKinley for the mountain in Alaska that Trump ordered renamed. That location lies entirely within U.S. jurisdiction.

Taylor Budowich, White House deputy chief of staff, said in a post to X Friday — one that was later released as a White House statement — that the AP “continues to ignore the lawful geographic name change of the Gulf of America. This decision is not just divisive, but it also exposes The Associated Press’ commitment to misinformation.”

While the First Amendment protects the AP’s “right to irresponsible and dishonest reporting,” it doesn’t ensure unfettered access to limited spaces like the Oval Office and Air Force One, Budowich said. He said AP would retain its credentials to the White House complex overall.

On Friday, an AP reporter and photographer had traveled to Joint Base Andrews for their participation in the traveling press pool to Trump’s Florida residence. But, after clearing security, neither was allowed to board Air Force One, a decision they were told was “outlet-specific.” Meanwhile, reporters in the press pool who were permitted on the plane sent the AP journalists pictures of cards with their names saying “welcome aboard” on their empty seats.

Other news organizations, like The New York Times and Washington Post, have also said they would primarily use Gulf of Mexico. Fox News said that it was switching to Gulf of America.

The White House Correspondents Association has issued statements condemning the action against AP. Although there are talks going on behind the scenes, individual news outlets have been relatively quiet.

The Times, through spokesman Charles Stadtlander, said on Friday that “we stand by The Associated Press in condemning repeated acts of retribution by this administration for editorial decisions it disagrees with. Any move to limit access or impede reporters doing their jobs is at odds with the press freedoms enshrined in the Constitution.”

In a statement, the Washington Post said that the AP’s “access to the administration is central for all journalistic organizations, including The Washington Post, in serving millions of Americans with fact-based, independent journalism each day.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who on Wednesday used the word “lies” in describing AP content, posted on X Friday afternoon about executive orders Trump had signed before his departure. She ended her post: “The @AP was not invited.”

Update February 15, 2025

$235,000 Settlement Is Reached in Police Raid of a Kansas Newspaper

 Via The New York Times

July 6, 2024

A former reporter of The Marion County Record has settled a lawsuit following a raid on the weekly newspaper last year that garnered widespread attention.

--"Ms. Gruver, who left the newspaper last fall, said in a letter to the editor that she “no longer wanted to work in a town where the majority of ‘leaders’ clearly don’t respect the Fourth Estate or the U.S. Constitution,” The Record reported."

More:

    ACCOUNTABILITY IS PAST DUE FOR KANSAS NEWSROOM RAID

   IN MARION COUNTY NEWSPAPER RAID, A GRIM THREAT TO KANSANS’ FIRST       AMENDMENT RIGHTS

Foot-dragging in Marion raid investigation should fill public with dread

 Via The Kansas Reflector

June 3, 3024

"I’ve had it.

Nearly 10 months after law enforcement officials raided the Marion County Record and two private residences, officials have yet to tell us the results of their investigations. That’s nearly a full year since a flagrant assault on free speech in Kansas, one signed off on by a list of city, county and state officials. True, a handful of individuals implicated in the scandal have left their roles in the intervening time. Lawsuits have been filed.

But we have not heard from those in charge. The Kansas Bureau of Investigation, perhaps realizing it had been compromised by involvement in the raid, passed the entire affair over to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation. They originally said results would come in April. We’re at the beginning of June, and those results still haven’t come.

Our First Amendment rights, those shared by both journalists and the entire American public, deserve better."

Read the full article here.

And background here, and here.

"The fact journalists were arrested for documenting events should concern all who believe in the free flow of information. "

 Via The Santa Fe New Mexican "Our View"

May 21, 2024

Journalists must be able to do their jobs

Journalists have no right to break the law in covering stories of public interest — that goes without saying even though the Constitution’s First Amendment clearly protects freedom of press. That freedom includes gathering the news, not just its publication.

Because of that protection, news reporters and photographers must be left alone to do their jobs. That’s especially true in a breaking-news situation in which impartial witness is essential. That’s one — but only one — reason police officers’ decision to arrest a reporter and photographer on the University of New Mexico campus while they documented the clearing of an encampment of student protesters is so distressing.

Independent journalist Bryant Furlow and photographer Tara Armijo-Prewitt — a married couple — were at the campus Wednesday morning to observe what likely would be the last days of the encampments. Furlow said he accompanied Armijo-Prewitt, who had been documenting the weeks-long protests, early Wednesday because UNM President Garnett Stokes had said the day before that police would be tearing the camps down.

Like reporters everywhere, Furlow wanted to be on the ground as news was happening. As with any potential clash between police and protestors, the public interest is clear. Journalists must be allowed to do their work. That did not happen last week.

According to a statement released through New Mexico In Depth — an online organization to which Furlow often contributes — the reporter gave his account of events, citing his request for information from officers on where to stand and his willingness to follow police instructions. He said he also informed officers he was a member of the media.

Nevertheless, both Furlow and Armijo-Prewitt were arrested.

The fact journalists were arrested for documenting events should concern all who believe in the free flow of information. Both state police and UNM campus police were involved in removing the encampments. Their bosses — Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and Stokes — should be investigating to find out why journalists doing their jobs and complying with officers were arrested.

The arrest after a reporter asked for a badge number and while photographing police actions is particularly troubling. It shows an apparent unwillingness on the part of police to have their actions documented for the public to see.

As Foundation for Open Government Executive Director Melanie Majors said, “If the media is arrested for doing their job, where does that leave the rest of us?”

The two, according to Furlow’s statement, were charged with criminal trespass and wrongful use of public property. They spent about 12 hours in custody after their arrests. Campus police made the arrests, and the correct action now is to drop the charges and apologize.

Further, given the tenor of the times — these protests are not going away — police at every level must be better educated about the rights of the media. Officers must understand they have no right to stop journalists from doing their jobs. In fact, when they do so, those officers are violating the Constitution.

There can be no freedom of the press without freedom to gather the news. Period.

 Statement from New Mexico reporter about his arrest at UNM encampment protest 

“Upon arriving on the scene, I asked officers where news media were permitted to stand to document the operation and did not receive an answer. I asked officers several times if there was a public information officer on scene with whom I could speak and was told there was not. I also inquired about who was in charge but got no response. We at all times followed instructions we received from police and stayed behind the yellow police tape. We were arrested while photographing the operation and shortly after asking an NMSP officer for his badge number and name. As I was being arrested, I said I was a member of the press repeatedly and loudly. 

“We spent approximately 12 hours in custody following our arrests. 

“We want to secure legal representation to fight the criminal charges before we speak further about our arrests.

“Thank you.” 

Handcuffs and Barricades at Columbia, but No Reporters

 Via The New York Times

May 1, 2024

Whatever one’s views on the pro-Palestinian demonstrations sweeping the nation’s colleges, the decision by the New York Police Department on Tuesday to block journalists from witnessing its raid on Columbia University was a clear infringement of the First Amendment.

Members of the public have a right to know what their law enforcement authorities are doing on American campuses, and they were kept in the dark at a critical moment.  click for full article

"We are deeply concerned by this violation of the First Amendment rights of these journalists"

 Via Associated Press: Newspaper publisher and reporter arrested and accused of revealing grand jury information

"In over 40 years of handling media law matters, Bailey said he had “never seen a reporter arrested for publishing truthful information about the existence of a grand jury subpoena.”

Committe To Protect Journalists: Alabama publisher, reporter arrested, charged with disclosing leaked information

“CPJ is outraged by the arrest of Atmore News publisher Sherry Digmon and reporter Don Fletcher and calls on local authorities to immediately drop all charges against them. They should not be prosecuted for simply doing their jobs and covering a matter of local interest, such as the allocation of school board funds,” said Katherine Jacobsen, CPJ’s U.S. and Canada program coordinator. “Journalists play a crucial role in their local communities. Arresting them creates a chilling effect and is a gross misuse of taxpayer funds.”

National Press Club: Press Club leaders condemn arrests of Alabama newspaper reporter and publisher

"Arresting journalists in response to the publication of a news article is contrary to democratic values. It should not happen anywhere in the world, and is especially concerning in the United States, where we have strong and well-established legal protections guaranteeing the freedom of the press."

Photojournalists settle long fought case against the NYPD

 Via National Press Photographers Association

September 5, 2023

Sept. 5, 2023 - The New York City Police Department (NYPD) has agreed to historic settlement terms with five photojournalists who were attacked and arrested by NYPD during the racial justice protests of 2020. The agreement reinforces the First Amendment rights of the public and the press, provides new protections for journalists operating in New York, and according to the terms of the agreement will improve police training and reinforce proper behavior toward the press.

The settlement resolves a federal lawsuit brought three years ago by attorneys from the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA), along with the nationally recognized law firm of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP and noted civil rights attorney Wylie Stecklow, on behalf of the five photojournalists, Adam Gray, Jason Donnelly, Diana Zeyneb Alhindawi, Mel D. Cole, and Amr Alfiky.


The agreement includes the following terms:

Journalists with press credentials issued by New York City’s Mayor’s Office of Media and Entertainment (MOME) will not need to leave the area when an order to disperse is issued to the general public and members of the press will not be subject to arrest for documenting police activity or for not leaving the general area;

NYPD will not arrest journalists with government-issued credentials for alleged low-level offenses (such as disorderly conduct or obstructing governmental administrations) without prior approval by an incident commander or a Deputy Commissioner, Public Information official. Any summons for such arrests will presumptively be issued to the journalist on site instead of at a police station, thereby discouraging the practice of unlawfully detaining journalists at police stations for hours before charges against them are dropped;

NYPD officers are prohibited from arresting, restricting, or interfering with members of the press for merely observing or recording police activity in public places;

NYPD will recognize the legitimacy of press passes that are issued by jurisdictions outside New York City;

NYPD is required to provide journalists with access “to any location where the public is permitted,” and NYPD officers are barred from putting up crime/accident/incident scene tape or establishing “frozen zones” for the purpose of preventing members of the press from viewing or recording events in public places;

Neither a press pass nor any other form of press identification is needed to observe or record police activity occurring in public places, including areas where protests, crimes, or other matters of public concern are taking place.


In the agreement, the NYPD also—for the first time ever—formally acknowledges that the press has a clearly established First Amendment right to record police activity in public places, and commits itself to respect that right. (See Settlement Agreement, ¶¶ 14, 89.) No press pass or other form of identification is needed to exercise this right. Pursuant to the agreement, the agency will update its guidelines, amend its current policies and training and will specifically train members of the service on treatment of the press and the clearly established right to record police activity in public. The agreement also makes clear that the increased protection for members of the press does not in any way diminish the right of citizens to record police activity in traditional public places.


“Journalists are an essential part of a functioning, civil society and it’s essential that they be allowed to conduct their work free of harassment and assault, especially from state actors,” said Mickey H. Osterreicher, general counsel to the NPPA. “On behalf of our members and all visual journalists, who perform a vital role as watchdogs and witnesses to history, I am very pleased with the terms of this agreement and the changes to police behavior that it demands.”


“This is not an agreement that will simply sit on a shelf,” added NPPA deputy general counsel Alicia Calzada. “It has real teeth and real mandates for improved training of police at all levels. We are hopeful this will truly change law enforcement culture when it comes to First Amendment activities.”


Attorney Robert D. Balin, who led the litigation for Davis Wright Tremaine accentuated the importance of the case. “The treatment that our clients received at the hands of the NYPD was not only unconstitutional, it was unconscionable, and a direct threat to our democratic principles,” Balin said. “I’m proud that these brave photojournalists chose to hold the police department accountable for their actions and I look forward to seeing the terms of this far-reaching settlement implemented for the benefit of all journalists.”


In addition to the policy changes, the settlement agreement also requires that the NYPD provide extensive annual training to all of its officers—ranging from Police Academy cadets to high-ranking executive personnel—on the First Amendment rights of the press and establishes a police-media relations committee to monitor and discuss future incidents involving the press. Additionally, for a period of three years, a committee headed by the New York City Department of Investigation will monitor police activity at protests to ensure that the NYPD complies with its commitments to respect the rights of peaceful protesters, journalists, and legal observers.


While pervasive mistreatment of journalists covering the George Floyd protests was the catalyst for the civil rights suit (see, Testimony of NPPA General Counsel Mickey H. Osterreicher June 15, 2020, OAG Hearing on Interactions Between NYPD and the General Public, p. 207), the scope of the agreement they ultimately hammered out with the NYPD reaches much further. The provisions in this settlement agreement related to the press are not limited to protest situations, but are crucial First Amendment principles that apply whenever members of the press are covering police activity in public.


“The NYPD’s abuse of the media has been a systemic issue for decades, and today’s injunctive settlement hopefully provides a brighter future for protest and the ability of the press and public to document police interactions at First Amendment activities and beyond in this great City,” said Wylie Stecklow, who in addition to his work on this case, regularly represents photographers and protesters whose rights have been violated by the NYPD. “But today’s announced settlement is not the end, it’s just the beginning of re-training and new NYPD policies to ensure there is respect and protection for the press, up and down the NYPD hierarchy. We cannot expect the rank and file to follow these rules related to the respect of First Amendment rights of the media, if high ranking officers are able to violate the rights of the media with impunity and immunity.”


The five plaintiffs in the case are award-winning visual journalists who have published their work in a variety of leading global news outlets, including Reuters, The New York Times, The Times of London, The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, National Geographic, Paris Match, Le Monde, CNN, BBC, The Atlantic, Rolling Stone, and more.


Adam Gray, former chief photographer for the British press agency South West News Service and repeat recipient of the Photographer of the Year Award by the British Press Photographers’ Association, was the first plaintiff to join the case following his wrongful assault and arrest while covering the protests. He was pushed to the ground without warning, arrested, and detained overnight while covering protests in and around Union Square. “I’m extremely grateful for the no-cost representation provided to me and the other news professionals by Rob, Mickey, Wylie and their teams,” said Gray. “These protests happened during a critical inflection point for U.S. society and I am hopeful this settlement will mark a major change in New York’s police culture as well.”


Jae Donnelly, a well-known photographer, and regular contributor to The Daily Mail, was violently assaulted by a baton-wielding officer while photographing protestors in the Hell’s Kitchen neighborhood. “Our lawsuit has fought to change the NYPD rule book on how NYPD from top to bottom treat us news gathering professionals with the professional courtesy,” said Donnelly. “We deserve to be kept safe before one of us is eventually killed at work. My attack by an NYPD sergeant put myself and my family through much pain,” he added.


Amr Alfiky —who was arrested while photographing police activity on the Lower East Side in February 2020, and, in a second incident, violently attacked by an officer while covering protests at the Barclay’s Center in Brooklyn—celebrated the agreement. “This settlement is indeed historic and goes beyond the compensation for the profound damage caused by excessive use of force and unlawful arrests towards visual journalists and photographers in New York City,” he said. “Hopefully, this is the start of a new era of how journalists are perceived and treated by NYPD.” Alfiky is now a staff photographer for Reuters in the Middle East.


Diana Zeyneb Alhindawi, a renowned documentary and news photographer, who was hit in the face by a baton-wielding officer while photographing police beating a young man in Lower Manhattan said, “as a photographer working in conflict zones around the world, I was stunned when the NYPD struck me with a baton, splitting my lip, when I was simply doing my job on the public streets of NYC a few days after the murder of George Floyd. It was the first time I'd suffered an injury while on the job, and it wasn't in war-torn Congo or South Sudan, but in the New York City. I'm glad to see that in the USA, however, when the rights of the press are so egregiously infringed upon, there is a legal system that can come to our support. I do hope our trial will move things in the right direction for us journalists to be able to do our jobs without fear of unlawful arrest or harm, and ultimately for freedom of the press and a more just society.”


Mel D. Cole, a widely published visual journalist and music photographer, was documenting police-protester clashes from the Brooklyn Bridge footpath when he was arrested, stripped of his cameras, and held for seven hours. “Going to jail for doing your job as a photographer should never ever happen. I'm happy that I can now put what should have never been behind me, but I will never forget the feelings that I had that day while being handcuffed and not being able to free when I should have been!” he said.


These terms are all part of a larger settlement announced today of claims that were brought on behalf of peaceful protestors by the New York Attorney General’s Office, the New York Civil Liberties Union, The Legal Aid Society, Gideon Orion Oliver, and civil rights firms Cohen & Green and the Aboushi Law Firm. The NPPA had previously filed public comments and testified during public hearings regarding the mistreatment of the press during the 2020 protests. Along with the agreed upon terms of the settlement, the photographers will all receive monetary compensation.


This significant civil rights litigation was supported by NPPA counsel Osterreicher and Calzada and a team that consisted of Davis Wright Tremaine counsel Robert D. Balin, Abigail Everdell, Alison Schary, Kathleen Farley, Alexandra Settelmayer, Nimra Azmi, Megan Amaris, Jean Fundakowski and Veronica Muriel Carrioni, and paralegal Megan Duffy, along with attorney Wiley Stecklow of Wylie Stecklow, PLLC.

About the National Press Photographers Association NPPA is a 501(c)(6) non-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of visual journalism in its creation, editing, and distribution. NPPA’s members include video and still photographers, editors, students, and representatives of businesses that serve the visual journalism community. Since its founding in 1946, the NPPA has been the Voice of Visual Journalists, vigorously promoting the constitutional and intellectual property rights of journalists as well as freedom of the press in all its forms, especially as it relates to visual journalism. For more information, go to nppa.org.

Photojournalists settle long fought case against the NYPD (nppa.org)

Marion County attorney withdraws search warrant against Kansas newspaper; returns items

 

Via KHSB Kansas City

August 16, 2023

By: Jessica McMaster

County attorney sites 'insufficient evidence' for search, seizure

MARION, Kan. — A search warrant that cleared the way for the raid of a Kansas newspaper last Friday has been withdrawn, KSHB 41 I-Team reporter Jessica McMaster learned late Wednesday morning.

Marion County Attorney Joel Ensey withdrew the warrant that served as the basis for the raid of the Marion County Record by the Marion Police Department last Friday.

As part of withdrawing the warrant, Bernie Rhodes, the attorney representing the newspaper, says all items that were seized as part of the raid have been released back to the attorney representing the newspaper.

The Kansas Bureau of Investigation shared Wednesday afternoon that its investigation will move forward independently "and without review or examination of any of the evidence seized on Friday, Aug. 11."

Rhodes tells the KSHB 41 I-Team that a forensics expert is on standby to examine the items that were seized. Once those items are in the possession of the expert, the expert plans to make a "forensic copy" and then check to see if anything was accessed or altered.

Ensey issued a press release Wednesday, stating the affidavits established probable cause that an employee at the Marion County Record may be guilty of unlawful acts concerning computers, but that there was not sufficient evidence between the "alleged crime and the places searched and the items seized."

The county attorney said he is asking the courts to publicly release the affidavits.

The KBI will submit findings of its investigation to the Marion County Attorney's Office.

Federal Appeals Court Undercuts First Amendment Protest Rights

 Via The Brennan Center for Justice

August, 2023

A federal appeals court recently ruled that a protest leader can be sued for injuries caused by a different protester during a demonstration, even when the leader did not direct, encourage, or even approve of the actions involved. The 2–1 decision in the case, Doe v. Mckesson, manufactured a legal loophole large enough to swallow First Amendment rights. To get there, the court disregarded long-settled law and twisted or ignored Supreme Court precedents.

The opinion is so untethered from settled law that it is hard to resist the conclusion that the court punished Mckesson because of who he is: a Black Lives Matter activist protesting police violence.

Good Trouble is on exhibition through September 17, 2023. "Protest is an invaluable way to speak truth to power. Throughout history, protests have been the driving force behind some of the most powerful social movements, exposing injustice and abuse, demanding accountability and inspiring people to keep hoping for a better future. The right to protest encompasses various rights and freedoms, including the freedom of assembly, the freedom of association, and the freedom of expression. Unfortunately, these precious rights are under attack and must be protected from those who are afraid of change and want to keep us divided."

Committee to Protect Journalists, partners call for charges against New York journalist Stephanie Keith to be dropped

 Via Committee to Protect Journalists

June 21, 2023

District Attorney Alvin Bragg
New York County District Attorney’s Office
One Hogan Place
New York, NY, 10013

Dear District Attorney Bragg,

We, the undersigned press freedom and civil liberties organizations, write to ask that you drop the disorderly conduct charge (Section 240.20, Subsection 6) pending against photojournalist Stephanie Keith, who was documenting a vigil when she was unjustly arrested by New York City police on the evening of May 8, 2023. Her prosecution would set a harmful precedent of prosecuting reporters simply for doing their jobs and documenting matters of public importance.

Leading up to her arrest, Keith was photographing a vigil organized to commemorate the May 1 killing of Jordan Neely, a homeless man who was choked to death on a New York subway train. Keith had been documenting demonstrations around New York in the wake of Neely’s death, with some of her coverage published in Brooklyn Magazine.

Around 8 p.m., Keith was near the northwest corner of East Houston Street and Lafayette Street when NYPD Chief of Patrol John M. Chell can be seen in a video of the arrest grabbing Keith’s arm. Chell can be seen forcefully pushing her into two officers in jackets marked “NYPD Community Affairs,” while yelling “lock her up.” Keith— who was wearing a press badge and was holding a camera— can be heard saying “Please don’t.” The photojournalist was then handcuffed and taken to the 7th Precinct, and then the 9th, where she was issued a court summons.

Later that evening, Chell said during a press conference that Keith “interfered” with three arrests before officers arrested her. However, Keith was simply doing her job and photographing police action and that evening’s vigil. No video has been released showing any alleged interference.

We are gravely concerned by the charges facing Keith. All of the videos of Keith’s arrest show that she was behaving professionally and trying to photograph events, and do not show her interfering with the police. Keith is an award-winning photojournalist whose clients have included Getty Images, Reuters, The New York Times, and Bloomberg. This year, she was part of the New York Times team nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for their breaking news coverage of a fire in the Bronx. Keith was not at the vigil to participate in a protest or interfere with police but to perform the public service of documenting the news, as she’s been doing her entire career.

Our organizations document cases of press freedom violations both in the United States and globally. Our research shows that arresting reporters is a crude form of censorship: it stops journalists from documenting current events, and protracted legal proceedings to dismiss baseless charges create financial and time pressures for reporters. It is disappointing and concerning to see these tactics being deployed in New York City.

Furthermore, the prosecution of reporters in the United States is exceedingly rare, according to the non-partisan U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, which maintains data on press freedom violations across the country. Prosecuting Keith would send a chilling message to journalists in New York City and beyond, and indicate to the wider public that New York City believes that members of the media can be prosecuted simply for doing their jobs.

We understand that your office does not usually take part in summons prosecutions, but we consider this to be an exceptional case. We urge you to dismiss the disorderly conduct charge against Keith and ensure that journalists working in New York City will not face punitive retaliatory measures from the city’s police.

Sincerely,

Committee to Protect Journalists

Freedom of the Press Foundation

New York Publishers Association

Coalition for Women in Journalism

National Press Photographers Association

Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Reporters Without Borders

Online News Association

The Deadline Club, NYC Chapter, Society of Professional Journalists

National Coalition Against Censorship

Journalists in America must be allowed to safely cover protests

 Via Columbia Journalism Review

June 20, 2023

Journalists in America must be allowed to safely cover protests

(Note: Monroe Gallery presents "Good Trouble", an exhibition of photographs that register the power of individuals to inspire movements and illustrates the power of protest from a deeply human perspective. Through this exhibition, we are reminded of the power of photographs to propel action and inspire change. June 30 - September 17, 2023)

A week after the May 1 strangulation death of Jordan Neely, demonstrators assembled outside the Broadway-Lafayette subway station for a candlelight vigil. Freelance photographer Stephanie Keith was there to cover events, and when police began to arrest protesters, she moved into the street to get the shot. Soon Keith was in handcuffs, being led away by two officers, facing charges of disorderly conduct. 

“I was dumbfounded. I thought it was a mistake,” Keith told me. “I really didn’t understand why this was happening to me.” 

Keith’s arrest might be a relatively minor incident in America’s press freedom landscape if it were not the case that police routinely impede the rights of the press to cover protests and demonstrations.

I spent 2022 as a fellow at the Knight First Amendment Institute researching the issue. I spoke with dozens of journalists across the country, with leading experts on policing, with First Amendment scholars, and with the police themselves (none would speak on the record). I pored over data from the US Press Freedom Tracker, and researched the history of police-press interactions from the civil rights era to the present day. My report “Covering Democracy: Protests, Police, and the Press” is out today. 

The report documents a troubling reality: despite the protection of the First Amendment, the right of journalists to cover protests has not been secure. As the Associated Press’s assistant general counsel Brian Barrett explained, what matters most “is what a police officer decides at two in the morning in a heated environment.”

In most instances journalists and protesters themselves enjoy the same rights, including the right to photograph and otherwise record events, so long as they do not interfere with the activities of the police. But by tradition, journalists covering protests have sought to distinguish themselves in some way—by standing off to the side, but wearing credentials or distinctive clothing, or by verbally identifying themselves to police. In most instances police respected the role of the press and allowed journalists to do their job. But where the institutional relationships have broken down, and particularly when police employ force, journalists have been arrested and attacked in significant numbers. 

The issue came to a head most recently during the summer of 2020, when Americans took to the streets in record numbers following the murder of George Floyd by police officers in Minneapolis. According to the US Press Freedom Tracker, 129 journalists were arrested or detained while covering the protests during 2020, and hundreds more were attacked or assaulted by police, in some cases resulting in serious injuries. 

One of the most notorious episodes occurred on May 30, 2020, the day after CNN correspondent Omar Jimenez was arrested on live television. That evening, as police in Minneapolis enforced a citywide curfew, they swept through a group of about two dozen journalists who were standing apart from protesters, wearing credentials and carrying professional camera equipment. Police attacked them using less lethal munitions, including pepper spray, and shoved several who tried to escape the onslaught over a six-foot retaining wall. 

Ed Ou, a Canadian war photographer who had moved to the US because he wanted to work in a country where the rights of journalists are respected, was hit in the face with what he believes was a flash-bang grenade; he was seriously injured. Ou later told me that because of the violence and suddenness of the police response in Minneapolis, “my radar for what’s safe has been completely fried.” 

Ou decided to participate in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU against the police and state and local authorities on behalf of journalists who had been attacked and injured. That case, Goyette v. City of Minneapolis, resulted not only in monetary compensation for the plaintiffs but a settlement requiring police to refrain from attacking or arresting journalists. A scathing Justice Department report on the Minneapolis Police Department released Friday noted that “officers regularly retaliate against members of the press—particularly by using force.”

Police in Minneapolis and across the country often claim they can’t possibly distinguish between journalists and protesters when everyone has a cellphone. But the First Amendment requires that they do so, as affirmed in the Goyette settlement and a federal court ruling in another case, Index Newspapers v. City of Portland. In that instance, the court determined that police must ensure that journalists are not subject to violence, arrest, and dispersal and directed officers to identify journalists based on observable behavior, often called a “functional test.”

Police at times have resisted that standard because they allege that protesters falsely claim to be journalists in order to evade arrest. But my research indicates that such behavior, while troubling, is exceedingly rare. Much more common, and thoroughly documented, are instances in which police attack, assault, or arrest journalists who are clearly identifiable and engaging in newsgathering. In one instance Australian correspondent Amelia Brace and her crew were assaulted live on camera by US Park Police while covering a protest outside the White House in June 2020. Brace later testified before Congress that she was shocked by the violence of the attack and that she had expected to work “freely and safely…in the world’s greatest democracy.”

Brace is right. The media has a critical role in ensuring that all First Amendment rights are protected, including the right to assembly and speech. The recent arrest of Stephanie Keith drives home the fact that, as Keith herself put it, “the cops are so arbitrary, and they have so much power over you.” As we enter a polarizing election session in which some of America’s messy politics are likely to play out in the streets, police across the country must ensure that journalists are able to document protests without the risk of attack or arrest. 

Joel Simon is the founding director of the Journalism Protection Initiative at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism.

Where the U.S. stands on World Press Freedom Day 2023 (May 3)

 

Via Freedom Forum

Where the U.S. stands on World Press Freedom Day 2023

As the United Nations marks 30 years of World Press Freedom Day on May 3, it’s worth remembering how a mere four words in the First Amendment – “or of the press” – is the basis for press freedom in the United States.

Despite having prime constitutional billing, U.S. news outlets and journalists don’t enjoy the freest press conditions in the world. The U.S. doesn’t even rank in the top 20.

Wait, what?

Reporters Without Borders (known by their French initials, RSF) ranks the U.S. as 42 out of 180 countries. But that is up two spots from the 2021 ranking.

As RSF’s annual report puts it: “In the United States, once considered a model for press freedom and free speech, press freedom violations are increasing at a troubling rate.”

Similarly, global advocacy organization Freedom House gives the U.S. a three out of four on press freedom conditions. Not the worst, but there’s room to improve.

Certainly the U.S. isn’t North Korea, which RSF consistently ranks last.

Nor is it Russia, where the recent arrest of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and ongoing treatment of imprisoned opposition leader, advocate of free expression and 2023 Freedom Forum Free Expression Award honoree Alexey Navalny makes the country’s press freedom ranking of 155 out of 180 countries seem too generous.

U.S. press freedom black holes

WEST VIRGINIA PUBLIC BROADCASTING

West Virginia Public Broadcasting, licensed to the state government, fired reporter Amelia Ferrell Knisely last December. The reporter claimed it was after pressure from state officials who didn’t like her reporting on accusations against a state agency and its treatment of people with disabilities.

NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik covered the fallout, reporting: “Interviews with 20 people with direct knowledge of events at West Virginia Public Broadcasting indicate Knisely's involuntary departure from her position as a part-time reporter was not an aberration but part of a years-long pattern of mounting pressure on the station from Gov. Jim Justice's administration and some state legislators.”

More than 200 local public radio stations, members of the NPR network, are independently owned and operated. Those stations are nonprofits, often licensed to public entities, such as universities, school districts, or in a few cases, state governments.

Whether these stations are licensed to an independent nonprofit or to a public entity, their editorial independence is what makes them essential and reliable news sources. Government funding of any amount does not equal editorial control. When interference happens, it undermines public trust in a free press.

FLORIDA LICENSE PROPOSAL

A bill introduced this year in Florida immediately drew the ire of free press groups – and Gov. Ron DeSantis – for seeking to make “bloggers who write about elected officials to register with the state.”

The bill doesn’t target journalists working at established news outlets, but the spirit runs afoul of the First Amendment.

“53% would support a special licensing process for journalists, like that for doctors and lawyers – perhaps not recognizing press freedom is a right for all and that licensing would limit this freedom,” according to Freedom Forum’s 2022 Where America Stands survey.

Proposals like this aren’t new, particularly in the past 20+ years as publishing and sharing information by people who don’t work for traditional news outlets has become easier. The First Amendment protects more than just “the press,” an amorphous term more than 200 years on. It protects every person’s freedom to talk, write, or share opinions about government or any topic. Attempts to license people, be they journalists, bloggers or your neighbor complaining on Nextdoor will always draw scrutiny as being unconstitutional.

 THREE AFFILIATED TRIBES

Despite the First Amendment’s broad protections for U.S. journalists, those freedoms generally don’t extend to sovereign Native American nations and their tribal-owned media. Federal and state freedom of information laws broadly guarantee anyone can request and receive communications of public officials and other government documents. But these laws don’t cover tribal governments.

For example, the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota have been accused of multiple transparency violations of its own constitution and bylaws, according to the Society of Professional Journalists.

These violations caused the Society of Professional Journalists to give the tribal nation its annual Black Hole Award, which “highlights the most heinous violations of the public’s right to know.”

Journalists who work for tribal-owned media and groups like the Native American Journalists Association and Indigenous Media Freedom Alliance have been pushing tribal governments to extend free press protections and broaden transparency, press access and freedom of information within their sovereign nations.

Continue reading

Photograph Daily Podcast: Meet Ryan Vizzions

 

Via Photograph Daily


September 16, 2020

Meet Ryan Vizzions, a photographer who started making pictures at the most difficult time of his life after losing his father to suicide. He quit his job at a Fortune 500 company, travelled half way across the world to Bangkok, a place chosen randomly from the spin of a world globe, to find himself alone in the midst of civil unrest in Thailand during the 'Red shirt protests' of 2010. It was to be a trip that shaped his photographic future covering stories of injustice and protest.

Ryan has since photographed protest and the plight of protestors whilst building what you could describe as a more ‘regular’ successful commercial photography business, but it’s clear where his passion lies, in making photo documentaries about social injustice. It’s a journey as you’ll hear in the continuation (part 2) of this story that has landed him with a government agency file. Today he is one of the growing voices in the photography community that believe it has become harder to tell photo stories with the freedoms once enjoyed.

Ryan Vizzions: "Defend The Sacred", Standing Rock, Cannon Ball, 

North Dakota, 2016

Photographs copyright Ryan Vizzions. Not to be reproduced or used without express permission of the photographer. 

Today's show is kindly supported by www.imagesalon.com - outsource your post production and spend more time shooting and working on your business with 25% off your first order in 2020.

Comment on the show: studio@photographydaily.show




Photographs copyright Ryan Vizzions. Not to be reproduced or used without express permission of the photographer.

FURTHER REFERENCE:

Thailands reds and yellows, a story published on the BBC website and a further article on the protests of 2010

NPR’s report on COINTELPRO

Photographs and the First Amendment. A Harrowing Journey Through U.S. Customs

Via Ohio ACLU

In the United States, people are allowed to carry a loaded gun capable of mass killings, but I was treated as a criminal for carrying a camera with the intention of helping people.

I am an independent photographer, artist, and journalist. For over thirty years, I’ve traveled around the world capturing images of culture and the human condition, and self-published 12 books of photography on subjects ranging from yoga, to animal conservation, to daily life in China, southeast Asia, Guinea, and Senegal. My work has been published by National Geographic and exhibited globally in art museums and galleries.

Earlier this year, my photojournalism work took me to the Philippines. Walking through the poorest neighborhoods of Manila, I was struck by the dire, heart-wrenching conditions of a neglected population. Currents carry mountains of plastic and industrial waste from Manila Bay and the Pasig River to form toxic cesspools near the Tondo and Baseco neighborhoods, laden with animal and human fecal matter. People have to live from this “dead” water, whether catching something to eat for the day or salvaging items from it to attempt to sell for a living.

For the record, it’s not uncommon in developing areas of the world to see young children unclothed in the streets.

But these children were swimming in toxic water and industrial waste, exposing themselves to cholera, typhoid fever, and other infections. Their parents allow it, even remarking that “we are going to die anyway, so what’s the difference?”

I took hundreds of candid pictures—street style; I posed nothing. Children I met would strike poses of their own when they saw my camera, smiling even in their grim surroundings. Sharing these images will be my way of pleading for help for a community that desperately needs medicine, education, and basic infrastructure. If the world takes notice, perhaps I can help make positive changes.

When I flew home, U.S. Customs and Border Protection detained me—with no explanation.

CBP pulled me aside after a 13-hour flight from Shanghai to Detroit, on my way home to Ohio. No one would tell me why they flagged me, and I still don’t know, but they asked to search my computer. It is possible that I could have avoided five months of psychological stress with three words: GET A WARRANT. But I was sleep-deprived, and innocent of any crime. So I let them. They took my phone, so I couldn’t let my waiting family know why I had missed my connection and wasn’t there when they came to meet me in Cincinnati. It was four hours before I was offered water to drink.

It was another half-hour before an agent read me my Miranda rights. Then he asked me if I had sex with children while I had been abroad.

“What are you doing here?” The agent knew that I was an American citizen, but I had to explain why I was coming to my own home country. I told him I was going to Cincinnati. “After that, where are you going?” I explained I was going to Dallas to meet with my wife, who was doing a training for Montessori education. He seized on that. “Does she teach children?” No, I explained. She teaches adults who teach children. “So why are you going to Dallas?” To be with my wife, and to photograph while I was there. His eyes widened when I said that, as though I had admitted to some kind of suspicious behavior.

I tried to explain the work that I do. They looked skeptical at my simple point-and-shoot camera, and told me I should have papers showing that I was a “real” photographer. They compared my images with drugs, as though I were smuggling contraband into the country. I was told that I should “learn a lesson” and “consider myself lucky,” because the supervisor believed me just enough not to lock me up.

When they were done, they kept my computer, my camera, and my smartphone, and the tens of thousands of photographs on them. Not just those from Manila, but also irreplaceable life moments with my wife and family.

Without my equipment or pictures, I was forced to halt my work. I had given my word to meet publication deadlines, but was suddenly unable to meet them. Over a month later, I finally received an official Notice of Seizure telling me that my equipment had been seized because it contained “visual depictions of sexual exploitation of children.”

To be accused of being associated with child oppression makes me physically ill. I am a professional photographer. This is my art, my work, and my life.

Lawyers from the ACLU of Ohio wrote a formal petition to CBP on my behalf. They explained that my work is valuable artistic expression, and protected by the First Amendment. Seizing my equipment was a violation of my constitutional rights. The National Coalition Against Censorship, along with the ACLU and other artistic and free-speech advocates, submitted another letter urging CBP to return my equipment.

Three months after they seized my equipment, CBP finally admitted there was nothing wrong with the pictures.

CBP promised to return my equipment, but only if I signed a release disclaiming my right to sue them for the wrongful detention and seizure. If I didn’t sign it, they said, I would have to go through a formal hearing process that could take many more months.



I made arrangements to pick up my equipment when I next passed through the Detroit airport. Incredibly, CBP stopped me again, and again they asked to search my belongings. I still don’t know why. Luckily, I carry the ACLU’s petition letter with me, right next to CBP’s letter admitting I did nothing wrong. I showed these letters to them, and eventually they let me go.

This time, when I left, I took all my equipment and all my pictures with me.

Freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press are not exclusive to America. These virtues speak to the fundamental nature within all human beings. The U.S. constitutional rights have worldwide appeal, because they contain the universal respect for the life-given Human Constitution that resides in us all. But those rights, these virtues, are under constant assault, now as much as ever. They must be defended, every single day.

I dream of a world where pictures for social change are no longer necessary. But until then, I will continue to do my work: to give voice to people like those children in Manila. I hope now that their voices will be heard.

I am incredibly grateful for the ACLU of Ohio’s timely intervention into this situation. Without guardians of our individual rights my work, my pictures, and the chance to help those children in Manila might have been lost forever.

WORLD PRESS FREEDOM DAY IS MAY 3

Via The United Nations

World Press Freedom Day was proclaimed by the UN General Assembly in December 1993, following the recommendation of UNESCO's General Conference. Since then, 3 May, the anniversary of the Declaration of Windhoek is celebrated worldwide as World Press Freedom Day.

It is an opportunity to:


celebrate the fundamental principles of press freedom;
assess the state of press freedom throughout the world;
defend the media from attacks on their independence;
and pay tribute to journalists who have lost their lives in the line of duty.


2019 Theme: Media for Democracy: Journalism and Elections in Times of Disinformation

The 26th celebration of World Press Freedom Day is jointly organized by UNESCO, the African Union Commission and the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. The main event will take place in Addis Ababa, on 1 – 3 May at the African Union Headquarters. This year's theme “Media for Democracy: Journalism and Elections in Times of Disinformation” discusses current challenges faced by media in elections, along with the media’s potential in supporting peace and reconciliation processes.

A Day Without News

The Without News profile picture the Newseum is asking people to download and use Monday.

(Courtesy Newseum)

Via WTOP

WASHINGTON — The Newseum will look very different Monday as part of an annual campaign called “Without News.”

“It’s a day when we black out the front pages of the newspapers that we display here at the Newseum, and also on our Today’s Front Pages website,” the museum’s Sonya Gavankar told WTOP.

She said the idea is to reflect on what the world would be like without the people who bring us the news.

“It’s an important time for us to really talk about the crisis of journalists in peril, and also the attacks on freedom of the press, not only in this country, but also around the world,” says Gavankar.

Supporters are asked to use #WithoutNews on social media, and download a special profile picture from the Newseum website.
            
Also Monday, at 10 a.m., the Newseum will rededicate its Journalists Memorial, adding the names of 14 members of the media who died on the job in 2016.

The ceremony is free and open to the public with advance registration, or you can watch it live online.

The event will be held on the anniversary of the death of NPR photojournalist David Gilkey, who was killed by the Taliban while covering the war in Afghanistan.

Several items belonging to Gilkey will go on display at the museum, including a camera lens that was hit by a rubber bullet as Gilkey documented clashes between Palestinian demonstrators and Israeli soldiers in the West Bank.