Broadcast Brian

A group of photographers protested English policing methods, accusing the UK of being overly ‘coercive’ when enforcing anti-terrorism laws.  Specifically, the photographers assert that they are subjected to unnecessary searches despite wearing their press credentials.

Most of the complaints seem to be coming from photographers who were stopped and searched while covering rallies and protests.  The group’s slogan, “I’m a photographer, not a terrorist” not only echoes Star Trek, but also indicates the level to which civil discourse has fallen in this strange age.  Compared with recent popular political slogans that essentially order people around, “Hope for Haiti NOW” and “Vote or Die”, it’s positively profound.

Still, photographers must accept their gadfly rep or risk shooting themselves in the foot when the case in question goes on appeal.  Paparazzi harassment of semi-notable persons in the UK is more of a sport than it is in the U.S.  The trial court’s ruling that two particular stop and searches interfered with the privacy rights of the photographers could open the door for an in-depth dialogue on privacy in a country that has embraced the security of surveillance society at an uncertain cost to person privacy and freedom.  Should some intrepid public or semi-public figure wish to speak up about THAT side of the equation, then perhaps the kingdom might take notice of just how many freaking cameras are watching its citizens already, and how ’sticky’ notoriety can be within the island nation.

As for the photographers who have been subject to what does sound like unnecessary contact with the police, they need to acknowledge that while they may not be terrorists, neither are they they anti-tyranny angels they may wish themselves to be seen as.  Protecting society and the individual against abuses of power doesn’t always mean taking the outsiders’ view.  It doesn’t always mean engaging in guerilla theater.  It isn’t all aping Banksy and hoping to get shaken down by bobbies.  If they want to be ‘left alone to do [their] jobs’, then perhaps they should approach this as something additional to the obvious free speech issue.  Without compromising their recent court victory, they could head off the government appeal by negotiating a pragmatic solution to the fact that they seem to activate the police spidey sense without meaning to do so.  It’s possible to infer from the timing of this complaint that the photographers are upset about a change in policing procedure.  If that’s due to new training that police have received, then maybe there’s a workaround.  War photographers, for example, receive training on how to operate across and behind lines during armed conflict.  Maybe there’s a way for the kingdom that invented manners to create some sort of etiquette that doesn’t impede upon freedom of expression of serious journalists or compromise the efficacy of policing during demonstrations.

The actual terrorists are probably super happy with this current controvery and hoopla because it’s been a while since anyone gave them any bright ideas.  They’d been busy wasting their energies training people how to blow up their underwear or attack the love boat.  It may be worth mentioning that the Taliban are known to pack a video camera.