Skip to main content

View Diary: Mitch McConnell campaign bans reporter from their events. It isn't going well. (122 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Maybe. I assume that the reporter was given (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joealan, occupystephanie

    a verbal " No Trespass" order, and upon his being notified of said, entry would become arrestable.

    It could go like-

    " They told us you're not allowed inside, so if you go in, we have to arrest you."

    Maybe not a threat- maybe a simple notification.

    And threatening someone with arrest in no way exempts a person from address. I mean, picture the scenario-

    A person is holding a knife up to the throat of another person. An officer states " If you cut him or her, we'll take you down." The person with the knife cuts the other person's throat. Is he or she exempt from arrest?

    •  Just stop (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      One Opinion, chrisculpepper

      The fact a reporter was banned from a political event that other reporters attended is the story.

      The fact the officer violated the reporters constutional rights is not in question.

      Despite your made up accounts of what you think happened that don't make the cop look like the corrupt thug they are being.

      •  You're right about one thing (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MPociask, Joealan, BelgianBastard
        The fact the officer violated the reporters constutional rights is not in question.
        They absolutely weren't- no question about it.

        The cop was doing his job. If he'd been a "corrupt thug", then $20 would have gotten this guy inside.

        I used to promote punk shows. We hired cops for security, through the PD. We would regularly ban people- they started fights, they dealt drugs, they harassed people. We would point them out at the door, the cops would tell them they weren't allowed inside, and if they attempted entry anyway, they'd be arrested.

        This isn't 5 bands 5 bucks, but legally, it's identical.

        Ya don't wanna listen, ya just wanna be indignant.
        So enjoy yer day.

        •  The First Amendment says otherwise (0+ / 0-)

          Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

          by Simplify on Wed Mar 19, 2014 at 02:11:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Press may have more privileges (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            than some boor trying to crash a rock concert.

            When a public official holds an event, and other reporters are allowed in (so it's not a private no-reporting event), there is a good argument that they can't exclude a particular reporter just because they don't like what he writes. It's the freedom of the press part of the 1st Amendment. Your guy trying to get into the rock concert can't claim that protection.

            It's not the cop who's the problem. It's whoever gave him the order to exclude this guy.

            That said, I can see a reporter choosing not to have that argument from a holding cell in the local lock-up.

            •  You're no Constitutional scholar (0+ / 0-)

              "When a public official holds an event, and other reporters are allowed in (so it's not a private no-reporting event), there is a good argument that they can't exclude a particular reporter just because they don't like what he writes."

              There is no such argument. It's their space and they write the guest list. Period.

              "It's the freedom of the press part of the 1st Amendment."

              The 1st Amendment doesn't grant the right to nose your way into private spaces where you're not wanted. If that reporter wants, he can write about how the rightful owner or user of that space won't let him in, and the 1st Amendment DOES protect that.

      •  First Amendment doesn't guarantee access (0+ / 0-)

        It only guarantees the right to speak and write about the fact that you were denied access.

        "The great lie of democracy, its essential paradox, is that democracy is the first to be sacrificed when its security is at risk. Every state is totalitarian at heart; there are no ends to the cruelty it will go to to protect itself." -- Ian McDonald

        by Geenius at Wrok on Wed Mar 19, 2014 at 04:02:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Freedom of the Press? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Singling out any reporter violates that.

          •  No it does not (0+ / 0-)

            Seriously, go read the First Amendment again and then come back and discuss.

            Freedom of the press is exactly and literally about the freedom TO PRINT, which in this day and age would include a wider variety of outlets that gets words and pictures out into the hands of citizens.

            Do not confuse that with the clause about freedom to assemble. They are separate rights and each is very specific. The freedom to assemble does not mean that reporters have the absolute right to crash a private event on private property.

            All that said, this incident does seem to violate the spirit of the law. Corporations and government officials have been "media trained" to the nth degree that they strategically try to blackmail reporters into reporting only agreeable stories, otherwise their access will be removed. And it is perfectly legal. Their PR advisers consider it a feature, not a bug, of the First Amendment.

            Many of us old-timers remember when reporters were the ones that had the upper hand. Government officials were obliged to not exclude based on the content of what a reporter wrote because otherwise they would be publicly shamed. Back in those days there was, minimally, a morning and evening paper delivered to almost every doorstep in every small town in America. People Then they watched Walter Cronkite on TV, who tried and mostly succeeded at following both spirit and letter of the Fairness Doctrine as it pertained to broadcast news.

            We live in a different world now. Reporting is still a badly paid profession but now it is being destroyed by the big corporations that own most media outlets. People don't read as much and they dislike being exposed to facts that contradict their political world view. So reporters that want to keep their jobs and their access are mostly stenographers.

            Corporations will not stop until they've abused or corrupted every amendment in the US Bill of Rights. And they will use and abuse the press as their main methodology (propaganda.) Public officials like McConnell are merely following SOP for the "new media" that these corporations have established. It's pathetic and alarming and very depressing. But it's (sadly) not unconstitutional.

      •  You don't seem to understand (0+ / 0-)

        McConnell and Co. rented the space. For the time being, it was THEIR space. They can pick and choose which reporters they allow in their space just as I can pick and choose which guests I allow in my home.

        Now, it certainly is convenient that they happen to have a police officer standing guard outside the door who can arrest trespassers immediately. Generally, if someone comes in my home and won't leave, I have to call the police and wait for them to show up. But when they do - if they do - they'll arrest the guy.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site