Is doing journalism a crime?
Earlier this month, “Democracy Now!” host Amy Goodman was charged by prosecutors for participating in a “riot” after her reporting on the Dakota access pipeline filmed security guards using pepper spray and dogs on protesters. Those charges were rightfully recognized as ludicrous and were dropped, but two other journalists who reported on the protests are not so lucky.
Documentary filmmakers Deia Schlosberg and Lindsey Grayzel are facing felony charges after filming two separate protests in North Dakota and Washington respectively, both taking place on Oct. 11. According to The Guardian, prosecutors argue that Schlosberg was “recruited” to record criminal activity, while Grayzel and her cinematographer are being charged for felony burglary, felony criminal sabotage and for trespass.
These charges are not just an attack on these journalists or their perceived political affiliation; these charges are a declaration of war against the First Amendment. There’s simply no way to respect journalism and freedom of the press and to simultaneously believe that these journalists deserve prison sentences for simple acts of reporting.
This isn’t the first time in history that journalists have found themselves targeted for doing their job, but to say that the stakes aren’t higher is to ignore the fact that the next president could be a man who would do irreparable harm to the world of journalism.
Republican nominee for president Donald Trump boasted in February that he wanted to “open up” libel laws, according to The Washington Post, so that winning cases against media companies would become easier. This past Sunday, he indicated that he would like to move American laws in the direction of England’s, where it’s much easier for the media to lose a libel case.
In America, journalists are not punished for publishing inaccurate reporting about public figures, so long as it was not done maliciously. England does not have that distinction.
Trump’s proposals to curb the First Amendment are not going to guarantee that journalists start saying nice things about him, but they do have the potential to affect the future of journalism for decades to come. His campaign has sought to sow seeds of distrust for the press and encouraged a hostile attitude toward journalists, one that will not just disappear come Nov. 8. In this regard, he is not just running against Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party, but against one of the most necessary American freedoms.
The history of America’s freedom of the press is long and dotted with both victories and setbacks, but prosecuting Schlosberg and Grayzel would rank as one of the biggest offenses against the First Amendment ever, as would allowing Trump’s ideas to come to pass. Those who enjoy living in a world where journalists have the ability to keep the public informed should stand against these attempts at destroying it.