Pixiq

For comments, I’d suggest Disqus. There’s a plugin for WP that does pretty much all of the work for you.

http://www.disqus.com/

I don’t think you need to change the name of the site, but maybe change the subtitle? ‘…and other first amendment issues’

:shrug:

I think it should stay just how it is. The first amendment and the things it allows us to do are very broad, so the title of your site helps give a specific direction or focus to the site. I think it helps tell the story of why you started your blog, and why you do what you do, even if it happens to cover violations of the first amendment that go beyond photography.

I fully agree with Rob.

Nothing further–

Carlos, you are drifting into a “grievance against the police” blog. I’d advice you aganist this. There are plenty of these blogs, and, while god knows there is a need, you do not want to be associated with the weird ones. What is unusual about your blog is that you are an advocate of issues in the intersection of law inforcement and your professional specialty. You are a photo pro, and you are exposed to police reactions to your work. Stick to what you know. It’s an important topic, and it does not get enough attention. Become the expert photographer’s blog about this topic. Hook up with first ammendment law blogs such as the Volokh Conspiracy and get links from them. Engage police blogs.

Become also an advice site, not just an advocacy one. You have learnt a lot about your encounters with the police. How would you suggest the average joe with an iphone act when the police questions him?

10 years from now our cameras will no longer be in our phones, but they will be invisible bluetooth devices conncected to our clothing, or even implanted into our heads. Will police engage in illegal searches to find them?

Current news, advice and future trends. This is what I’d like to get from your blog.

The name is spot on and should stay as is. Just because you go off on a tangent once in a while is no big deal. Keep up the good work Carlos. And who knows, maybe one of these days we’ll make a libertarian out of you!

I second Andrew’s nomination of Rob’s post
Workingindust´s last blog ..C-17 taking off at Kandahar Airfield

Keep it, the core idea is solid, gives a strong foundation to the site.
Donkeyrock´s last blog ..Twitter Updates for 2010-01-22

The thought has crossed my mind recently…

On the one hand, the title is clearly no longer a particularly accurate description of the contents of the blog. Just a weighing of recent topics shows that most aren’t about either photography or the first amendment.

On the other hand, the general theme is consistent, and you’ve never held this out as single-minded…it’s always been apparent this is a personal blog, with an EMPHASIS on photography confrontations.

On the gripping hand, there are many people who may be interested in the broader categories you blog about beyond just photography who may not come here with that title.

Tough call.

no change

no change!

I like the current name but have no problem with you posting other stories about police abuse and cases where our rights are violated. Heaven knows we are very close to a complete police state all in the name of security.
Those who would trade safety for freedom deserve neither.
Thomas Jefferson

I think Jay is spot on — just make the subtitle something a little more broad. The photography angle is your hook, and it’s normal for blogs to stray from topic.

I vote no; but will continue to be a reader and referrer regardless of the title.
The Boise Picayune´s last blog ..Green Day – American Idiot… TGIFF!

I think the site is well named, especially as you’ve noted, it is the core and focus of your interests.

Regarding improvements or features, I’d like to see a single RSS feed link to comments. New articles appear in my feed reader, but comments do not. A single feed for all new posts to the articles would streamline things for me, and perhaps for others using rss.

Please keep the name and for that matter please do not expand the scope.

If it were me I would have set this up as another site away from my name and used carlosmiller.com as my portfolio site. Unfortunately photographyisnotacrime.com is taken.

I actually agree with this nearly 100%
While I like reading about how some first amendment rights are violated sometimes it’s just a silly waste of time, and all it does is promote fear mongering.
Get into giving advice for what to do if you get approached by police, or what to do if you get arrested, or what to do to prevent yourself from getting in that situation.

As for the title/subtitle, I would keep it. I like it, and like the 1st amendment, it covers a broad range of topics.

I would not recommend moving all your posts to a new domain, there are more headaches associated with that then it’s worth.

Your blog goes into 1st amendment, 4th amendment, and 5th amendment issues. You focus is on the 1st amendment still.

One thing I would suggest is to remove the columns on info about yourself and about recent post/comments(now that I look at it you have a lot of crap unnecessary stuff here that will probably annoy your repeat readers).

You already have an “about” page so this column is redundant and takes up a lot of screen real estate. Move this information on separate pages where you have links to navigate to them on the top page near the title.

Just keep in mind that more people are switching to monitors with an aspect ratio of 16:9. It’s favorable to design your page to take advantage that.

Hazy,

That part is actually in the works. But it’s easier said than done.

I would vote to keep the name, keep your content about where it is.

I would suggest nixing the floating “follow me on twitter” thing on the right. Strange and annoying to me. A link to your RSS feeds with a link to your twitter would probably work fine. Don’t over think the comments. For the vast majority of users, getting their name and comment up is all that matters.

No change.

Gun rights blogs don’t change just because they cover 1A and 4A issues in addition to 2A.

I have no problems with the comment system. Please DON’T use Disqus. Ever. Period. Thank you.

Hazy,

Thank you for the comments. I see what you are saying about the 16:9 size as I have a 16:10 screen myself since 2004 (1680×1050). According to the server logs the usage breaks down like this.

Screen Resolution – Visits
1280×800 – 19.32%
1024×768 – 17.69%
1280×1024 – 13.00%
1440×900 – 12.62%
1680×1050 – 10.23%
1920×1200 – 6.35%
1366×768 – 3.36%
1920×1080 – 2.10%
1152×864 – 1.96%
1600×1200 – 1.61%

We are investigating methods on making the theme scale with your resolution.
TheRealEdwin´s last blog ..Our reputation perseveres.

How about:

The 1st Amendment is Not a Crime

I also want to add that I stumbled by your site Carlos while looking for info on DHS Agent Luis Martinez. I was appalled by what I read and immediately signed up for your RSS. Carlos, if I didn’t have your blog, I would not have any idea of these atrocities. It is your courage and defiance of the bigotry and deplorable treatment of not only the 1st amendment, but also the despicable treatment of human beings by the police. It’s too bad that some call you bias when you are simply stating the facts and your right to an opinion. These folks apparently don’t understand the importance of our first amendment rights.
Every day, you provide us with insight. Every day, I get angrier and angrier with what I read. I know there are good cops out there. But these idiots, like Luis Martinez who quote and apply dangerous tactics need to be exposed.
When Luis Martinez could not get the feds to file charges against my friend, he filed a complaint with the county for allegations he thinks he has enough evidence. He has no idea of the evidence this person has and he may want to make sure he has clean socks on when he sticks his foot in his mouth again.

A question – My friend was interviewed/investigated by Homeland Security and went alone. He wanted to record the meeting with the agents knowledge. The agents would not give their permission for him to record the interview. Now, since there were two agents and just my friend, it’s their word against his.
Did he have any legal rights to record the interview?

Did the interview take place within a federal building?

What reason did they give for not allowing him to record the interview?

I bet they recorded the interview.

He should have refused the interview if they refused to be recorded.

He should have brought a lawyer.

Are you asking whether he had a legal right to record the interview without their knowledge?

That’s a debatable point that I hope some lawyers would answer.

If the interview was in a closed room, they would argue that they had an expectation of privacy, so they could use that old wiretapping charge against him.

Not sure if it would stand in court but it would turn into a legal battle.

No change–keep it up!

PINAC has such a nice ring to it.
KEEP IT!

Keep the name the same but add a byline that reads something to the effect of “And other constitutional issues”…

The interview was in the local public library. They did not give a reason – just said they did not give their permission – Maryland requires both parties to agree. Anyone within ear shot heard the interview.

We’re just surprised that they would not let him tape the interview. What were they concerned about? Why would if matter if they were doing the correct thing? Generally, when police question a suspect, they record the interview. (I thought)

I think it’s fine the way it is,
but you should try to stay honed in on photography rights and not just drift into police abuse of power and whatnot.

I would prefer to see more of a focus on photography and less competition with theagitator, who is the best at that kind of stuff.

Got blocked from Maz Jobrani’s show with my Nikon D80 tonight. The Wiltern was full of point and shoots with their inane flashes and distracting viewscreens. The venue even had a “text us your photos” gimick! But my D80, that never flashes when it’s not supposed to, doesn’t glow back constantly from a display screen, and, if the subject stands still for a half a second can take a crisp shot in any light, that they block at the door. So it’s not just the police, the world is full of camera haters.

What’s funny is that nobody ever complains about my monopod, a 14 inch pole I can jam into my gut to hold a camera steady without touching the ground. Or use as a club, whichever. It’s the SLR people complain about.

Carlos,

I would not change the name. I’m also a photographer and we need more sites like this showing up when people search to find clarification of their rights.
Tim Post´s last blog ..But I Just HAD A Vacation!

Don’t change the name. I come here to read stories about the difficult transition in the digital age.

Carlos. Keep the name and keep up the phenomenal work. Your tenacity is inspiring and your coverage of various events (for photographer and alike) a real service.

You’ve got a brand now — can’t change it. But you can add something like “Photography Is Not A Crime and other issues of rights violations”…but probably not /that./

Heck no! “Photography is not a crime” rolls off the tongue, it is edgy and in your face defiant and easy to remember to pass along to friends.

He should have said, “fine,” gotten up and said “see ya.”

Are photographers no longer being treated as criminals? If they still are, then don’t change the name.

I like the name, and its close enough to the subject material.

As long as you’re looking for bad and unpaid advice, don’t optimize the site for wide-screen, but rather be agnostic about the view dimensions. Going forward you are going to see an ever more diverse assortment of devices viewing your pages. Wide screen isn’t the next universal standard, it’s just the thin end of the de-standardization wedge.

Your subject matter is much more diverse than just photography. While you’ve built a brand, the title isn’t exactly accurate any longer.

Get rid of the banner with the pic of the cops that look all dumbfounded in your website revision. When in doubt, take a lesson in how reddit.com is designed. Simplicity is elegant.

Site name is fine … there’s no need to change it.

I don’t know what percentage of international visitors you have, but something to consider when writing.

I’m from the UK and the phrase ”first amendment right” has little meaning for me … sorry for being so ignorant about your country’s politics.

Your blog has been and continues to be very informative.

Hey guys, I appreciate all the feedback and I agree with most of it.

I’m not going to change the name, but I did change the subhead from “it’s a First Amendment right” to “and other First Amendment issues.”

Hazy,

The banner photo is my brand. It serves as a reminder to cops who want to make up their own laws that can be permanently immortalized on the internet.

I don’t like Reddit’s design because it lacks images.

OK, I just switched the subhead to “and other First Amendment and police issues.”

I’ll see how that goes.

I would like to buy the photographyisnotacrime.com domain, but somebody owns it and I don’t want to pay Go Daddy $69 for them to make an attempt to buy it (where I would have to pay even more).

OK, I’m going to shut up now because I obviously haven’t settled on the subhead.

Carlos, I assume with the $69 you’re talking about Domain Backorders? What that does is wait to see if the person forgets to renew their registration, and then snatches it. If you want to buy it, send an e-mail to PHOTOGRAPHYISNOTACRIME.COM@domainsbyproxy.com. That should get forwarded to the actual domain owner, who can contact you if they’re interested in selling the domain name.

Carlos,

Did not speak up earlier since i thought the site name was just fine. Have no problem with you changing it a bit.. it is, after all, yours.

I like the idea behing the new sub-head, however have one little comment…

You can shed light, or you can shine a light; I don’t think that it is proper usage to “shed a light”. I have been known to be wrong on occasion, though