Can suburban police officers be considered real police

Journalists' Associations: Police violence against reporters at the G20

I think it is unreflective what you write about "journalists' rights". Every journalist usually researches, tries to get an idea of ​​the situation. But you cannot do that on site. Police officers are trained for such operations. Anarchists are also, they know how to hide and strike, uninhibiting others to participate.

Because police officers are uniformed, you won't become a we-group with them. You are being filled with propaganda. You have private political sympathies. By definition you are not close to objectivity when you are in the middle of it, but you do not realize that. You consider yourself sacrosanct because you are the press. You comment that the police do not have the situation under control, but you still stay on site. Strange, emotional things happen. There is a tribal pull, what Canetti calls mass, that takes you in. You and many people around you are disoriented and traumatized.

This also happens to professionals. Example, a friend of mine had a shell shock in Gaza when a grenade hit and was filming in a circle; he also has mild autism. A prominent RTL war reporter A. R. came to the place with her people. She asked her companions why the guy was filming her. My friend was then collected by Hamas and taken to a kind of creepy torture station ...

Another example: two cyclists turning in front of me are hit by a car at the intersection. One thrown across the car. Lots of people from the surrounding shops step out onto the street, all focused on the accident victim, talking weird stuff. Nobody cares about securing the scene of the accident, the road. People want to move the victim, which seems totally dangerous to me. I employ a woman to fetch blankets. All with a kind of traumatized tunnel vision. I instinctively know that now I have to do what no one is doing, look where no one is looking. Secure and document the accident site, warning triangle, etc. The totally shocked driver who hit her does not check that it was her mistake. Ambulance and police arrive later. Lots of people traumatized by the situation, who could not have seen anything, stand around and disrupt the operation and make false testimony that incriminates the cyclist.

Next example: May 1st last year, I happened to be a witness, we walked as non-participants from the waffle shop home in the opposite direction to the highly disciplined demonstration, how the C&A building was demolished out of nowhere, a small squad stormed in with Bengalos, fog turned towards the police thrown. We fled behind the police. Then other things flew towards the police. The police remained very professional and controlled. In retrospect, it was strange that an RT camera team filmed the situation on the corner, but in such a way that I strongly assume that they were informed in advance that something was going to happen here. That is exactly what we have with the G20. Journalists who work together. If I knew the name of the RT journalist who was responsible for the pictures, I would not accredit him as the BKA.

What is the dangerous thing about the situation for journalism associations? I think lack of distance. If someone has a problem with the police operation, they can complain and record their point of view. Why do others now have to make common with him before all facts have been researched according to the rules of journalistic art? What kind of journalists were they? Was it even journalists or activists with press cards who only wanted to agitate against the police? Are there other witnesses? What does the police say, the police officer in question who was on duty, etc. Why do you now have to run a campaign for freedom of the press and support agitation against the police without doing any research?

If you look at the image material, you will see numerous mistakes made by journalists and "citizen reporters", e.g. a lack of awareness of the dangers and a subjective view of an unclear situation. Police officers are trained and organized and are also responsible for your safety as a journalist and for bringing you out of danger. If someone threatens you as a journalist with a gun, it may be blatant and it may also be wrong. But it is a tough, unmistakable sign that, from the point of view of the police, you are in the wrong place, either standing in the way, obstructing the operation, crossing borders in some other way or standing next to you. It is possible, of course, that the police want to prevent you from arresting police misconduct or that the police officer himself has a bike. De-escalation then simply means following it first.