Welcome to SPJ Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

Guilty of committing photography

If Krayeske's description of the incident is accurate, he's only guilty of taking photographs in public. That's not a crime.
As a photojournalist, I'm troubled that he can be arrested for taking photos....whether he's a journalist or not in this instance doesn't matter. Anyone should be able to stand on a street and photograph.

There can be a separate discussion of who is a journalist and who isn't. That may be the key to whether SPJ provides financial support to his case.

I don't like the idea that a person can be detained for standing on a street photographing.

 

Published Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:04 PM by MikeKnaak

Comments

# re: Guilty of committing photography

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:05 PM by Mike Knaak
I'm not sure how posting the description of what happened can be hostile
The level of detail along with links to coverage is helpful for people who can't do firsthand investigation.
There should be a discussion of what happened based on the record and the facts. Krayeske's description aids that discussion.
As I wrote...there are two issues...standing on the street "armed" with a camera is not a hostile act. Journalist, bystander, political activist...doesn't matter. Taking photos should not get you arrested.
Is he a journalist? It doesn't matter. Should SPJ support him? Now it's time to discuss whether he's a journalist.
As to privacy...are you kidding. Krayeske has stepped into the public debate and is asking for a money from an organization that believes in open discussion.
Anonymous comments are disabled. Please log in or create an account to comment on this article.