portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting united states

actions & protests | police / legal

#georgefloyd 2 reporters, 1 white, 1 Black. Guess which got arrested?

This story hit various news outlets early this morning.

Two CNN reporters and their crew are in Minneapolis. Reporter Josh Cambell is white. Omar Jimenez is Black.
This story hit various news outlets early this morning.

Two CNN reporters and their crew are in Minneapolis covering the killing of George Floyd and community and police response. Reporter Josh Cambell is white. Omar Jimenez is Black.

After being told that he was under arrest for not moving when told to, Jimenez, his producer and his photojournalist were placed in cuffs.

This all unfolded live on the air.

Despite protestations from Jimenez relaying that they were just getting out of the way as troopers advanced through the intersection and that they would move to wherever media is supposed to move if only told where, all three were taken in and held for 2 1/2 hours before being released. The MINN State Patrol released the statement that they were held then released once they were confirmed to be media.

This is highly suspect as Jimenez and crew are clearly seen showing their identities.

CNN reporter Josh Campbell, who was stationed a block away from Jimenez and crew, said law enforcement approached him, but didn't ask him to move or arrest him once he identified himself as a journalist. Campbell is white.

To his credit, MINN Governor Tim Waltz stated "There is absolutely no reason something like this should happen," Walz said, adding that he is "owning" this and taking full responsibility. "This is a very public apology to that team. It should not happen.

Both work for corporate mass media and only C.M.M. is reporting on this 29.May.2020 14:59

_

end of story

Replying to corporate mass media comment 29.May.2020 17:39

alza miento

You are not accurate. This is carried internationally by mainstream and alternative media.

To support this arrest when considered in context is racist, no matter what outlet one works for.

Some questions 30.May.2020 22:34

alza miento

To the two who have commented if you are still around; I don't know how closely you have been following the nation wide protests. I and some in my collective have been viewing/listening to coverage from MS and alternative media in addition to some of us being on the ground with little sleep.

We have seen the demonstrations begin peacefully. By nightfall it seems that things fall apart, to put it lightly. Historically, this falls right into place. If you are aware, and care to respond, how do you feel about the actions of protesters who in PDX and across the nation who have set property on fire and vandalized small and corporate businesses? Any opinion?

And as we speak, MSNBC and CNN reporters are getting their asses kicked by po-po. This should make you quite happy! Heh... Put the coffee on, another long night.

Also 30.May.2020 22:40

alza miento

What news source do you two or anyone wanting to respond, get your news from? Can you recommend any print, radio or online sites?

I viewed several independent journalist video streams, past 4 days 30.May.2020 23:34

_

I don't have an opinion per se on what the protesters are doing (although I'd perhaps ? prefer that they confine property destruction to large corporate and banking entities, rather than visiting havoc upon locally-owned storefronts and public facilities such as libraries for example...) but yes, the observed pattern is generally consistent even if the demonstration / protest > riot actions themselves seem chaotic. Loose associations seem to form among various groups of people in the street (whether or not they already know each other), on what location to travel to or direction to move in, objects to use... these associations blend and coalesce into different consensus actions by the group(s), together. For example, the collective 'decision' to confront (or disperse-retreat from) an approaching phalanx of police coming up the street. A spontaneous move to tip over trash barrels and light them up as flaming obstacles between themselves and the police line. Throwing of deployed CS gas canisters, back at the police et cetera. These actions are seamlessly, simultaneously improvised and deliberately taken. The protesters, depending on their numerical density can seem like an organism unto themselves. It was quite fascinating to watch on ground with an embedded journalist observer's livestream and also from drone or helicopter aerial view cameras. The on-ground journalist streams included a few brief spontaneous interviews with protest participants which was also enlightening.


RE: news sources, everyone should use their own critical discrimination of sources of information with knowledge of inherent bias and editorial mission in each. For example, perhaps one could consider the generally fine journalistic integrity of World Socialist Web Site, and The Wall Street Journal to be roughly comparable although they represent 2 opposite poles of ideological viewpoint; their writing and reporting is consistently reliable.

thanks for asking, hope that helps.

To anyone 30.May.2020 23:43

alza miento

When and where did you first hear of/see the video of the killing of George Floyd?

That's good advice 31.May.2020 08:27

Mike Novack

"RE: news sources, everyone should use their own critical discrimination of sources of information with knowledge of inherent bias and editorial mission in each. For example, perhaps one could consider the generally fine journalistic integrity of World Socialist Web Site, and The Wall Street Journal to be roughly comparable although they represent 2 opposite poles of ideological viewpoint; their writing and reporting is consistently reliable."

But I will add, the "unreliable" sources (SEVERELY slanted, affecting journalistic integrity as well) can also be useful in their own way. Precisely because they are trying to deceive, if used carefully, they can point you to what you should look up elsewhere to get the real story << it is easier to look up information about events if you know WHAT to search for >>

I think I need to give an example of that, for which I'll use Fox. Which most here would say "lies" but that does not EXACTLY describe what Fox does. So a couple weeks ago, Fox headlines/story "progressive primary challengers backed by AOC lose" with the story going on about how two such primary challenges failed. But this is FOX, so you should think SOMETHING about the story wrong or misleading. What might that be? Well maybe AOC was backing more than two primary challenges. You would look up about AOC backing progressive primary challengers, and you'd quickly discover that there were three, not two, and the third did NOT lose.

But back to the first advice you were given, we could point you to more sources with good journalistic integrity. But for each, you still have to learn what the editorial position is. The two examples you were given were excellent precisely because in those cases, should be obvious what the ideologies are. But with many others, you'll have to dig a bit.

RE: "where did I first hear about the killing of George Floyd" 31.May.2020 14:03

_

I first saw notification of the murder on an ideologically right-wing oriented web site with a section that freely reposts news and discussion items (where they regularly happen to discuss the topic of and news concerning police brutality against citizens).

after seeing it as a fast-breaking news topic there, I went to Google and found one of the first citizen bystander videos of the Minneapolis killing which had been posted on YouTube. That video, and the early CBS News report about the killing were reposted here :  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2020/05/438561.shtml

RE: news sources to "get your news from" 01.Jun.2020 08:21

_

as discussed ^ above, any news, concerning any topic whatsoever, in the all-internet, all-the-time age we presently reside in is to be taken with the consumer's own care and discernment as to its reliability and worthiness.

at this point, with so much of the 'news' today being dispersed in Tweet-soundbite and other editorialized form there are no really excellent alternative or non-corporate mass media sources of news. When a breaking story emerges about anything, the corporate media 'reputable' (?...) sources and wire services such as AP, Agence France-Presse, Reuters, McClatchy, UPI etc. report the item/event and then other secondary sources typically digest, analyze or break it down. Most of the televised corporate mass media 'talking heads' are not journalists at all but merely function as celebrities.

Current protests/riots: the embedded streamer journalists-videographers using technology of livestreaming via mobile device + internet have been extremely valuable documenters of events and individuals' narrative stories and experiences. No way can corporate mass media, even with their helicopter/drone aerial views, hope to accomplish or encompass what they do.

Investigative reporting has become a thing of the past; even proper critical analysis and op-ed reviewing of news topics (see Counterpunch for example as a pale shadow of its former 1980s self) has turned pathetic. Personal blogs have taken over; everyone with an internet connection is now an 'expert', on everything from virus epidemiology to U.S. race relations/police violence.

I find *The Intercept* to have some worthy investigative and critical analysis journalism, from the likes of the outstanding exiled Glenn Greenwald (who was the only reporter on earth to properly document and investigate the 2001 anthrax attacks) and many others. For example :  http://theintercept.com/2020/05/29/george-floyd-minneapolis-police-reform/

Thanks all 01.Jun.2020 11:49

alza miento

Appreciated.