Goodman had the audacity to commit this journalism
In news of the Dakota Access Pipeline, and freedom of protest, and freedom of the press –
his Monday afternoon, as the sun hits its peak over Mandan, North Dakota, the award-winning journalist, and host of Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman will walk into the Morton County–Mandan Combined Law Enforcement and Corrections Center and turn herself in to the local authorities. Her crime: good, unflinching journalism.
Goodman had the audacity to commit this journalism on September 3, when she was in North Dakota covering what she calls “the standoff at Standing Rock”: the months-long protests by thousands of Native Americans against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The $3.8 billion oil pipeline is slated to carry barrel after barrel of Bakken crude through sacred sites and burial grounds of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, and tribe members fear it could pollute the Missouri River, the source not only of their water but of millions of others’, should the pipe ever rupture.
Goodman went there to report when all the major news media had totally ignored the subject.
Clutching a large microphone, she captured the scene as hundreds of protesters tried desperately to stop a crew of bulldozers from tearing up the earth—the earth, they said, that belongs to nobody—only to be confronted by a force of private security contractors wielding attack dogs and pepper spray.
“People have gone through the fence, men, women, and children,” Goodman reported, her voice taut, then rising, louder and more intense. “The bulldozers are still going, and they’re yelling at the men in hard hats. One man in a hard hat threw one of the protesters down…!”
She continued reporting as the security contractors attacked the protesters.
“Why are you letting the dog go after the protesters?” Goodman could be heard shouting at a security contractor as a woman screamed in the background. “It’s covered in blood!”
Within hours of the attack, Democracy Now! had turned its footage into a seven-minute video that it released as a web exclusive. Three days later, Goodman followed up with an extensive report—“Dakota Access Pipeline Co. Attacks Native Americans with Dogs and Pepper Spray”—that she broadcast live on her show. The video quickly went viral, pinging across Twitter and Facebook (where it was viewed more than 14 million times) and landing, ultimately, on the same big news stations that, until that moment, hadn’t bothered to cover the protests: CNN, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, NPR.
It was a few days later that the Obama administration put a temporary halt on the project.
Yet, on September 8, Goodman received the news that Morton County, North Dakota, had issued a warrant for her arrest. The charge: riot, a misdemeanor punishable by jail time and a fine.
She’s a journalist, and she was there reporting. There’s good evidence for that, such as the video and extensive report mentioned above.
told the Grand Forks Herald that he did not, in fact, consider Goodman a journalist. “She’s a protester, basically,” Erickson told the newspaper. “Everything she reported on was from the position of justifying the protest actions.” And in The Bismarck Tribune he later added, “I think she put together a piece to influence the world on her agenda, basically. That’s fine, but it doesn’t immunize her from the laws of her state.”
When asked to explain the grounds for arresting a working journalist, EricksonIt’s worth pausing here for a moment to contemplate the full and chilling absurdity of this statement: According to Erickson, a woman who appeared at a protest carrying a microphone emblazoned with the name Democracy Now! and trailing a video crew; who can be heard in the resulting video report identifying herself to a security guard as a reporter; and who then broadcast the video on the daily news program she has hosted for 20 years is not actually a journalist.
By that logic, Lizzy Ratner points out, Ida Tarbell and I. F. Stone weren’t journalists…which is a reductio ad absurdum, because they decidedly were journalists.
So far, North Dakota is refusing to drop the charges.
This should definitely mean that all the Fox news reporters should be jailed; after all, they must not be journalists because they present the information in a way that advances a particular agenda. But you won’t see people picking up the Fox news reporters on the scene of a protest against police shootings of people of color. No, because they are just “reporting”, and letting you “decide”. Right. Right?
Was a precedent set by Fox in 1996 Akre vs Florida (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre) that “it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast”? “We agree with WTVT that the FCC’s policy against the intentional falsification of the news-which the FCC has called its “news distortion policy”-does not qualify as the required “law, rule, or regulation” under section 448.102.” ( http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1310807.html)
It would be interesting if this could be used as a precedent to challenge the charge “Everything she reported on was from the position of justifying the protest actions”.