Author Topic: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary  (Read 4040 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

John Lehmann

  • Guest
  • Posts:
MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« on: June 03, 2013, 07:38 PM »
NPAC Commentary

The muddy river of Canadian journalists' rights and responsibilities just got a whole lot murkier with the arrest on June 2 of Toronto Star journalist Alex Consiglio.

Consiglio is charged with the horrible crime of actually doing his job, in this case photographing an unfolding news event at a Toronto GO transit station, where police and transit officials were dealing with a transit officer who'd been injured.

To understand how we've come to this sorry state in our efforts to do our jobs, it helps to unravel what goes through the brains of the spin-makers who now project the faces of just about every corporate and public institution in North America.

You are not hearing the transit board chairman or anyone else who actually is charged with making decisions of the kind mentioned here. You are hearing the voice of the media relations manager, the publicist, the public relations officer – or whatever other title they dream up for the individual who is the human shield between their organization and the media.

Anne Marie Aikins, the media relations manager with Metrolinx,  told The Star that news photographers are not allowed to take photos without Metrolinx permission at Union Station.

She said working journalists need to sign a waiver before taking photos and that the increased popularity of social media and smart phone cameras are adding new challenges for GO officers “during potentially dangerous situations.”

In this particular case, the only danger would seem to have been the headlock police put on Consiglio after he took a photo of the injured transit officer being taken away by medical personnel.

Of course, there's also the much bigger danger to our basic rights and freedoms. A waiver before taking photos? Is she daft? Well, no, she's just doing her job of “managing”, but the key question that needs answering is this: What exactly is she managing?

If, as her title suggests, it is “media relations”, she has badly overstepped the line. Let's parse  a few words here. “Media” is that overarching umbrella under which we relegate everyone from Ben Mulroney reporting on the latest expensive shoe styles to those news photographers who put themselves in the line of fire while covering the 2011 Stanley Cup riots in Vancouver  . “Relations” refers to connecting with, to ensuring that those journalists hired to do their jobs of reporting the news through both words and images can do so without interference.

Were it not for the professionalism and tenacity of Canadian journalists, the spin-makers would never have allowed the Rob Ford imbroglio to continue for this long, they would have buried the Senate scandals under mountains of committee reports, and cases of police brutality such as the Robert Dziekanski tasering homicide at Vancouver International Airport in 2007 would not have surfaced without video tape evidence.

Bert Bruser, in-house counsel for The Star, says Metrolinx requirements for photographers are “stupid” and “silly”, and the transit body's handling of Consiglio's case has raised a storm of criticism. 

“All journalists should do exactly as Alex did and that is to do their jobs. From what I've seen, he didn't do anything wrong. He was doing his job as a journalist (in) Union Station which has to be one of the most public places in Canada,” Bruser says.
Journalists have to continue to do their jobs and not be intimidated, and that's just at minimum, he says. “It's stupid to have to ask for permission to take a photograph.” But the question of whether Metrolinx has the right to demand this makes it much more complicated.
“I believe this is covered in the Charter of Rights, but it's not yet been tested in the courts. One day, I hope it is. Freedom of expression includes the right to report on events as well as to publish,” he says.

For now, says Bruser, “This incident is a dramatic example of how, in this country, photographers are hindered in doing their job. We're still trying to figure what the hell happened. Alex has been charged with trespassing and has to pay a fine of $50 or something like that. There's no way he's going to pay that fine and it will likely go to trial. But this will take some time.”

It may also be time to think up some strategies to help loosen the noose around our necks created by over-enthusiastic media handlers. We don't need handling, we need help in doing jobs that are more essential than ever to a free and democratic society, witness what happens in countries where there is little or no press freedom.

There is strength in numbers and it may be time for us to join hands with other groups such as the Journalists Association of Canada which is as concerned as we at NPAC are with the increasing number of hurdles being placed in the way of quality journalism. We should keep hammering home the message that those precious individual rights we tend to take for granted are being eroded, one trespassing fine at a time.

NPAC Board of Executives

« Last Edit: June 07, 2013, 08:12 PM by John Lehmann »


Offline David Chidley

  • Professional
  • near Calgary, Alberta
  • Posts: 291
    • Dave Chidley website
    • Email
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2013, 10:17 PM »
Bravo John and the Board. 

This certainly is not the time to allow the social importance of the media to become less effective. Lord knows the business side of the media is in enough trouble.  With less man power watching/checking/digging/reporting/recording/and creating images of history we don't need a diminished ablility to do our jobs.   


Dave Chidley Photography
http://davechidley.ca/

Offline Ken Gigliotti

  • Retired Professional
  • Posts: 353
    • Email
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2013, 09:39 AM »
 Yes , a long posting ,political , great,  photographers can speak . Well done , taking on an issue.This issue has a web of many  issues.
 When it comes to photography there is always a gap . If it goes to court and I doubt will , unless there is some other element , it would be good to see the result and or video.
 A reporter  walked up a guy on the street in Wpg  just after his house blew up in a gas explosion. The guy was very upset by the presence of the reporter  and gave him a punch , in fact two punches . Charges were laid and in court it was decided that the guy , under emotional duress could be forgiven in the first punch , aggravated assault , but the charge stuck as he should have stopped at one .
  Photographing in shopping malls and other public /private places  might be a good addition .  The issue of assault ,another . When ever it has happened in the past  the papers always assumes the photographer is at fault and it is handled quietly . I one case it was decided out of court, the photog and the cop  were  both having a bad day.
   Press freedom  is usually defined  in terms of print not photography. We are the battered spouse of our culture .
  Don't get me started on the touchy business of access to information regarding police radios in newsrooms.  Police control technology essential to proper news gathering and there is no reason news organizations should be barred from monitoring a general call channel . This has a very long precedent  . It is not unlike communications specialists controlling  general information about  any company or political party .  NO one owns the air the messages travel in. One of the biggest set backs for newspaper  reporters and photographers is access . The information on the general call channel forms the basis for spot news in a web moment  , police beat reaction that  day , city hall news tomorrow ,   provincial government involvement  or inquiry in fallowing  months , court news in a year and Federal law making after that . Much of the news  newspapers report originate as a critical incident from a 911 call .  Police , ambulance and fire response calls over air  are the under pinning of what we do.  CO2 in homes , van doors popping open and ejecting passengers ( mostly children and seats) during MVC's , car theft craze of a few years ago, all  led to provincial  and federal criminal & code changes ,schoolyard  bullying attracted attention  and  action from the PMO's office  started from many teen suicide and assault  calls across Canada .All started as a 911 call , their frequency and fallow up led to positive attention and change .. I understand every newspaper / TV managing editor has asked for a police radio and they said “no”. And the next step is?! Take'em to court as a class .   Photographers need to stand up for each other and news organizations have to do the same . That means TV , radio and newspapers .

« Last Edit: June 04, 2013, 04:23 PM by Ken Gigliotti »


Don Denton

  • Guest
  • Posts:
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2013, 10:15 AM »
John:

Will you be sending this out to newspapers across the country for possible editorial page use?

dd



Victor Biro

  • Guest
  • Posts:
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2013, 05:22 PM »
FYI, The Globe's Peter Power has written an excellent blog post on the topic of the erosion of the Constitutionally protected rights of journalists to do their job:

http://petermpower.blogspot.ca/2013/06/freedom-of-press.html

It would be great to be able to do my job without having to worry about the fickle disposition of police towards the news media.



John Lehmann

  • Guest
  • Posts:



John Lehmann

  • Guest
  • Posts:
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2013, 07:52 PM »
John:

Will you be sending this out to newspapers across the country for possible editorial page use?

dd

Good idea Don however I think at this point the Star would be the only ones interested in running the editorial and a copy of it has been sent to them. 

We will be following up with Metrolinx, GO Transit and Toronto police with a letter from NPAC.


Thanks
John



Offline Ken Gigliotti

  • Retired Professional
  • Posts: 353
    • Email
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #7 on: June 05, 2013, 08:44 AM »
 Murky , an interesting term . Everything that ever happens has happened to a reporter already . Reporters have been to court and decisions become precedent. Newspapers love this stuff when it happens to a reporter . They never see action.
  We seem to change gears when it comes to photography . Except that would be a mistake . If we define ourselves as journalists or reporters with cameras then nothing changes . If the police asks  us to move back then in most cases we move back .Show me the line . But the reporter doesn’t stop reporting . Moving back a photographer does not mean we have to stop taking pictures . The police may interpret  the “moving back” as stopping a person from taking pictures  but they would be wrong and all photographers  and police should know that .
   In the cases I know , we never get to a judgement stage , there is no formal recognition that a photographer has the same rights as a reporter.
   If a photographer is moved back , then jumps back into the play  with  wide angle , and closes the distance it can be argued that they are just doing their job , but it also changes the dynamic for the gate keeper .Moving back in ,  they see as loophole and enforcement of an original order is needed to counteract the  breach. This is the murky part .
    These  confrontations are inevitable  , everyone should expect to be caught in this no win situation of entering public/private property to cover a news event . We have the ability/right to trespass  and we also must face the consequences of a confrontation . Be ready ,these confrontations can be life changing , because  they cause severe anxiety problems in a job rife with anxiety .
   These are inevitable ,shake them off like a goalie would on a 3on the goalie play , do your best and shake it off and move on . Let the lawyers handle it.
  In the words of a country song - “ we aren't  wrong , we aren't sorry , and it is probably going to happen again . If further help is needed for anxiety ,  your doctor has lot to offer .
  Confrontations  are common and they wear on people from the inside out .

« Last Edit: June 05, 2013, 09:37 AM by Ken Gigliotti »


John Lehmann

  • Guest
  • Posts:
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #8 on: June 09, 2013, 03:42 PM »
From yesterday's Toronto Star.

Toronto Union Station waiver rule for journalists criticized

Q&A with John Lehmann, president of the News Photographers Association of Canada, on Union Station photography rule.

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2013/06/07/toronto_union_station_waiver_rule_for_journalists_criticized.html



Victor Biro

  • Guest
  • Posts:
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2013, 03:33 PM »
Has there been any developments in this case?

Is TorStar going to be going to court on this?

Thanks
Victor



Bill Sandford

  • Guest
  • Posts:
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #10 on: July 25, 2013, 11:10 PM »
As someone who has been arrested, charged, and tried for obstructing police while on a street corner in Toronto, I know these confrontations happen all the time, and will continue. The incident happened while covering a collision involving several cars on the Danforth at Jones Ave. Although we didn't know it at the time, this huge crash involved a stolen pick-up truck being driven by the son of a  police officer. I think alcohol was involved as well. The pick-up was driven through the intersection at high speed against a red light. Fortunately, the only people killed that night were the two idiots in said pick-up.

We wasted money and the courts time to come up with a saw off of a verdict. I did obstruct the police officer by questioning his authority to keep me from doing my job, but there was no criminal intent in the act. I left the court that day, sort of exonerated, but still feeling the sting of the arrest. Just for the record, the arrest happened in 1980, so things really haven't improved any. This was at the beginning of my career as a "news" photographer at the Toronto Sun, and over the 20 years I worked there, I had many clashes with police over access to big news scenes. Eventually, you learn there are ways to circumvent the obstructions, and I won a number of awards given by the Toronto police and the various fire departments and EMS for news photos depicting their activities. Funny thing, they try to keep you from taking photos, then give you an award if you manage to show them in a dramatic image.

The Star reporter/photographer actually got a decent shot from outside Union Station, but there could have been some effort to work with him in the public/private space that is the building. That is the grey area that has to be dealt with. New York City press photographers have been fighting for years to make sure their rights are enshrined in the daily orders given to the officers on the street. During 9/11, there were some attempts to stop photographers, but as the incident progressed, it was so huge that it just didn't matter any more.

I would be happy to help out in any effort to press for some clarity in this matter if I can. I've had a lot of experience over the years in dealing with police and press relations if you want to tap it.

I'm sort of retired and living in London Ont..

Bill Sandford




Offline Warren Toda

  • Administrator
  • Toronto
  • Posts: 2024
    • www.warrentoda.com
    • Email
Re: MUDDY WATERS, MURKY OUTCOMES - NPAC Commentary
« Reply #11 on: September 18, 2013, 02:03 AM »
Trespass charge was dropped on Friday Sept 13.

Spokesperson for Metrolinx (which runs the train station?) said there was a "misunderstanding" among its security people. No apology from Toronto police for their assault on the Toronto Star reporter.

« Last Edit: September 18, 2013, 02:10 AM by Warren Toda »

Photographer in Toronto
info@warrentoda.com