Pixiq

I agree, the "establishment" media is part of the problem. Funny, when the Bill of Rights talks about "freedom of the press", it says nothing about credentials.

The "press" was defined in a 1938 US Supreme Court decision. “The press, in its historic connotation, comprehends every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion.” Lovell V. City of Griffin. Thus anyone who's ever published in any media is a member of the "press" and the First Amendment applies.

You need to differentiate because the press is doing a job. They're covering a story, and while the police might need to arrest protesters from time to time, the need to arrest members of the press for being present is never there.

Arresting the press is a bit like arresting paramedics on site, it's ridicolous.

It really irritates me that people are under the notion that press must mean you work for a TV station and that it affords you more protections than a standard citizen. Press can mean anyone gathering information to disseminate to the public. In the recent case of Glik V. Cunniffee, Savalis and Hall-Brewster; Appellate Judge Young states in his denial of immunity of the police who arrested Glik,

"It is of no significance that the present case, unlike
Iacobucci and many of those cited above, involves a private individual, and not a reporter, gathering information about public officials. The First Amendment right to gather news is, as the Court has often noted, not one that inures solely to the benefit of the news media; rather, the public's right of access to information
is coextensive with that of the press."

He also continues with,

"Moreover, changes in technology and society have made
the lines between private citizen and journalist exceedingly difficult to draw. The proliferation of electronic devices with video-recording capability means that many of our images of current events come from bystanders with a ready cell phone or digital camera rather than a traditional film crew, and news stories are now just as likely to be broken by a blogger at her computer as a reporter at a major newspaper. Such developments make clear why the news-gathering protections of the First Amendment cannot turn on professional credentials or status."

http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/10-1764P-01A.pdf

So yes, no need to yell out that you're press. The minute you have a camera in your hand you are considered it via the 1st amendment. Whether or not this person was impeding police or breaking any law is not something I could speak about since the video was very short and chaotic.

"But if you say it, at least represent it with ethics, accuracy and fairness."

then you wouldn't be working for Fox News or ESPN.

:-)

Pull that stunt on JL and he'll revoke it with his Glock.