Anarchists Think Photographers And Reporters Are The "Fu*king Enemy"

  • Posted on: 9 May 2012
  • By: worker

<table><tr><td>From <a href=""...

<p>A week ago, <a href=" hundred protesters ran through Lower Manhattan on a "Wildcat march"</a> that was coordinated around other <a href="">May Day protests.</a> Some black bloc tactics were used, but most of the violence was directed towards photojournalists, as several fought with protesters who were attempting to damage their cameras or prevent them from covering the march. A <a href="">thread on Anarchist News calls</a> the photographers "vultures" and notes, "journalists are fucking enemies." But how many protesters actually believe this? And what does it say that a faction of anarchists seem to be <a href=""... a page</a> from the NYPD in <a href=""... what press can and cannot cover?</a> </p></td><td><img title="We need to do more propaganda around how the 'free press' isn't free nor tellers of great truths." src=""></...

<p>The issue of some protesters targeting photographers covering the Occupy Wall Street movement came to the fore after videographer Tim Pool <a href=" footage of protesters letting the air out of an NYPD squad car's tires the night of the eviction.</a> Since then, protesters engaged in black bloc tactics&#151;illegal actions that some in the Occupy movement embrace as part of a "diversity" of tactics&#151;have <a href=" to damage or confiscate cameras documenting them.</a> </p>

<p>"The protesters' argument is righteous, but is also silly," José Martín, a 30-year-old activist and Marxist who has been involved in militant actions for over a decade and attended the Wildcat march, says. "Still, there is some philosophical legitimacy to what these people are saying. We're not here to legitimize the state. If journalists are willing to incriminate those engaged in illegal actions, it's very difficult for me to suggest they shouldn't be angry with the photographer."</p>

<p>He points to videographers like Tim Pool, <a href=" "If you're willing to say, 'I want to hold these people accountable,' and you have this mentality that you're not just an objective observer but one with an agenda, I can definitely see why protesters want to prevent him from filming."</p>

<p>But isn't censorship a tool of the state as well? "I don't think it's a question of censorship, but more of a tactical necessity. That said, if I saw someone beating a photographer or trying to steal their camera, I'd probably try to stop it." Martín, who says he has an idea of the type of person who may have posted the article on Anarchist News, calls the site, "a dumping ground for communiques on the <a href="">ultraleft.</a>"</p>

<p>Pool responds via email, "Everyone wants accountability for others and not themselves. I cannot judge someone for what they do but I can show the world what happened and<br />
let them decide." He adds, "I generally just film what happens around me, I don't seek out certain behaviors."</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"> <div class="image-none"> <img alt="5812wild2.jpg" src="" width="640" height="423" /> <br /> <i> NYPD TARU officers take video from multiple angles of a protester's arrest on May Day (<a href="">Jessica Lehrman</a> / Gothamist)</i></div> </span></p>

<p><a href="">Ellen Moynihan,</a> an independent photographer who had black paint thrown on her face and portions of her camera during last week's march, says, "The idea that people who are anarchists can tell me what to do is ridiculous. If you're going to create a public spectacle in a public street you're out of your mind if you think people aren't going to photograph you." </p>

<p>Moynihan's camera ended up being fine, as did <a href="">Stephanie Keith's,</a> another independent photographer who <a href=" in a tug-of-war</a> for her camera with a protester masked in a bandana. "This idea that we're all making a ton of money off exploiting their image with our fancy cameras, it's crazy" Keith says, referring to the signature on the Anarchist post that reads "the &#8220;did you know that a photographer's camera could pay your rent?&#8221; collective." </p>

<p>Keith didn't sell any of her images from last week's march. "I didn't make any money," she tells us. "But this is still my livelihood. I'm worried that these people are going to be sprinkled in with the Occupiers, most of whom are happy that we're there shooting. And mostly what we're shooting is abuses by the NYPD." </p>

<p>Keith adds that she was lucky: <a href="">Lucas Jackson from Reuters ended up trading punches with a protester, </a>and at least two other photographers were involved in physical altercations with protesters. The Anarchist post <a href="">uses a photograph taken by our own Jake Dobkin to misidentify Guardian reporter Ryan Devereaux,</a> claiming he "attacked one of our female comrades." This reporter accompanied Devereaux for much of the march, and didn't see any evidence of him tussling with a protester. A representative from The Guardian tells us, "Ryan wasn't involved in any altercation on the march, and any suggestion that he was is false." </p>

<p>Martín questions whether the Wildcat march had any lasting effect, in part because it seemed to be focused on tactics and not strategy. "Fetishism of tactics, the fetishism of journalism, fetishism of non-violent protests, of GA's, even the word 'occupation' is very harmful to a movement," Martin believes. "When that happens, people stop thinking in a strategic, analytical way." </p></div>

<div class="entry-contact">Contact the <a href="">author</a> of this article or email <a href=""></a> with further questions, comments or tips.</div>


Srsly good trolling dandies. However, these "journalists" are breaking rules 1 & 2. The new battle will be to get dox on journalists and post those online. Their lazy research should suffer the consequences since our research into their lives will trump them. We'll show them what real investigations look like!

glad i started doxing anarchists in my area.

By "doxing" do you mean "looking up the Facebook pages of"?

Seems like that would be one easy way to do it, given the false sense of security people have in using facesnitch. I imagine the journalists do the same to their know, not the lazy ones that browse anarchist comments for sourcing. Obviously this is also lazy, but not as lazy. Even more real journalists would do the IRL thing and track around doing f2f interviews, feeding nonsense to those they interview to make them drop their guard like Breivik in a police uniform.

any and all public information there am to be found.

So, you got to and type "Anarchists" and see what turns up huh? Most peoples "dox skills" are fucking worthless. I am guessing you suck dick at it

:( No kitten-face, I do pretty well.

Bullshit, you're a newdandy. You couldn't dox your way out of well-lit, moistened, paper bag.



To me it all comes down to who or what the photo-reporters are actually filming... if it's the faces of people who take part in an "illegal" protest, then yeah, they are the Enemy. And their cameras can be a nice addition to your collection!

But there are also reporters who take shots of the police repression that mainstream outlets will not report... The only people who'd attack these reporters would be obvious undercovers.

you can't tell what they're going to do by looking at them, or even by what they say. only sometimes if you know them personally. and not even all the time then.

No, but you can tell by looking at what they DO. If they get to be filming protesters all the time, in disrespect for their confidentiality, that pretty much draws the line in the sand.

so people should be busy watching the photogs all the time when they're in the middle of conflict? and should wait for someone to be tagged to know what the photog is going to do? and should assume that they'll see everything the photog is shooting even if they're being watched?

three big raspberries for your reasoning there.

Oh come on... what's the argument?

Photo-reporters are easy to get across... in some areas they are all over the place in protests! No we shouldn't be watching them all the time, but when they get to be bothering us with them taking pictures of our pretty faces, they deserve to be shown some respect.

...or perhaps we could also film them on their way home, in their condos, and send everything on YT?

So, if someone is trying to kill me, I can't tell them what to do, and I allow it to happen?

Press to anarchists: you will do as we say. All are subject to us. We will photograph you without consent, and you will not know what we are going to do with, because we don't allow for you to have a say in that either.

Sounds like democracy. You are free, because we give you the options to select. Choose between candidate a or candidate b.

And that question about safety toward those doing illegal things is never addressed. Well, fuck you!

Everyone should read Jacques Ellul's 'propaganda.'

yeah lol

These days in Democracy Inc, we've got news anchors on radio vomiting the most fascist propaganda since 1933, all in the comfort and safety of their TV/radio tower. Today a CBC news reader was openly promoting the "anti-mask" law of the Harper government, that's also aiming to criminalize all protests that aren't going by the rules of the Police. And it's these same fucking rats who are calling for humanitarian bombings in "repressive regimes" abroad...

The realization that the media is a component of this totalitarian regime is a key revolutionary moment in consciousness.

If you are in public, you are making a spectacle of yourself. There are cameras everywhere to begin with. If you don't want to be recorded doing something illegal, don't do something illegal... Or cover your fucking face. It's that easy. COVER YOUR FACE.

Been there, done that... But now I'm not 12 anymore. And I respect the rights of others to do as they please as long as they are not hurting me or anybody else. You "anarchists" don't respect those rights, and that is the difference. You are a tool of the system, not a tool destroying it. Really, you're just tools.

"covering your face" often isn't a total guarantee of privacy. "There are cameras everywhere" that's just an excuse. Why contribute to surveillance culture? Why hurt your comrades by helping the state identify them? The problem is that filming others doing illegal shit is hurting them... though not physically.

So people who aren't showing their face can be identified? How does that work? If you all dress in black and cover your faces, you'd be impossible to tell apart.

It's not my fault if you have a weird haircut or are wearing a shirt that gives you away. Dress in black and cover your face. Cameras don't really have the resolution to take good photos of your finger prints (on the street, anyway), but just in case they do: wear gloves.

It goes both ways: we have a responsibility (or something like that) to be good at being anonymous, sometimes it's our own fault when people get caught. But, at the same time when camera people have the option of not filming or filming when they are asked and they refuse, well then they are in part responsible for whatever happens as a result of that footage.

I take it you're of average height, weight and body type?

Of all of the photos I've seen from this incident, it doesn't look like too many people aren't in a very general category for weight and height, so I don't understand what you are getting at.

Furthermore, police can't charge you with a crime based on being the right height and weight. That'd be laughed out of court. They'd need more evidence than that.

Some anarchists use two masks, in case one falls off. Hope that helps.

Two masks sounds good. It is not a good idea to depend on a hood to provide any part of your anonymity. Hoods fall down when shit goes down! Hood are useful in obfuscating height/headshape and in shielding the back and sides of the head from chemical weapons.

you might want to wear a helmet. When you go to Chicago you'll find out what a real ass kicking is. :>)

> You "anarchists" don't respect these rights
> "anarchists" don't respect these rights
> anarchists don't respect rights


You're a winner!

p.s. respecting rights = being a tool of the system. have a stupid day

I love how journalists think they're exercising their "right to free expression" more by pushing a button on a camera than by participating in a political demo.

For any photogs reading this, it seems difficult for you people to understand. There are at least 3 very simple reasons you're a pain in the ass at radical political events:

1. YOU'RE the ones censoring and repressing people by behaving as potential snitches, recording illegal behavior, putting people in danger by revealing identities etc. Your physical presence and your snapshots do not stop police brutality and only hinder the movements of protestors who may be maneuvering to avoid arrest.

2. If you work for the corporate media, your boss is our enemy and you represent a whole industry that is actively trying to crush our political project.

3. You're a passive spectator, behaving like a consumer and a vicarious thrill-seeker at an event where the whole point is to destroy these pathetic roles through participation and empowerment.

Bingo. Photo/video journalism compromises our safety, quite possibly endangering our lives. It helps the state, it does nothing for us.

Secret time: If you cover your face, nobody can reveal your identity. Then you can do as you please, and the journalists can do what they please and no innocent citizens attack one another.

Save your hate for the actual state. There are plenty of cops to attack if destroying the state is your goal.

come on, man. Yeah wearing a disguise is essential we all know that, but sometimes it's not perfect. Those glasses you wear, the shoes you have on, the mask that slips at the wrong moment - better if mainstream media don't take shots of vandalism. Plus, even if they're not endangering anyone, they're still passive consumers acting like a protest is a spectator sport, and helping corporate media distort and lie. When photographers are just as vigilant about going to photograph the crimes of generals, presidents, and CEOs, and talking shit about them on their news shows, maybe I'll relent.

I talk shit about cops all of the time. I hate cops because they don't respect the rights of others. Anarchists are no different according to this.

Rights? Really? Cite something else abstract or made-up, pls. Part of the function of police is to ensure that you have "rights" to some things, and no "rights" to others. To get past needing the police, you have to get past this notion that "rights" are something that actually exist in that sense.

Now needs. Those are something that everyone actually has and that we should respect when they mesh with us or are "important" enough. If we want to talk about the needs of reporters to feel safe while "trying to do their job" or "bring truth to the world", and the needs of people fighting for their lives to feel safe from the effects of the reporters needs. Then we have an actual debate.

Yeah, you talk shit to cops all the time...LOL Go to Chicago and find out what getting your ass kicked is all about. Ever think that cops hate you too shit head?


When living in a police state and publicly and wilfully breaking laws, the importance of avoiding unnecessary surveilance is obvious. After every bloc the local police trawl the web and contact local journalists for trial evidence. Journalists are an integral part of the panopticon, despite their personal intentions that might be totally benevolent. Journalists are not "the enemy" but if they are assisting "the enemy" that is a problem for anarchists who wish to not go to prison.

There is also the anarchist desire to not have one's own rebellion commodified by journalists, absorbing rebellion-as-image into the capitalist spectacle. This desire is perhaps less obvious to the uninitiated, but anarchists have been communicating it since as early as the '60s, so any half-assed google-using journalist investigating anarchist tactics should be familiar with this sentiment.

-anarchist against panopticon

Hell to the yeah! I mean, "no way-- Jose."

Coming soon:

Black Bloc officially declares all-out war on the authoritarian Media!

Take note: Posting an article or comment to A-news is tantamount to talking to the mainstream media.



Dave......When you photograph me you are snitching on me, unless we are in love......

Where shall we dine tonite, darling?

- Reuters reporter

Reuters reporter.......Later.....But first there's a small repair to be done on the transmission disk in vacuum space and absolute zero outside........I'll prepair the space pod for you and will be in full control,,,darling.....

clarity from the gothamist comments section: "Now really...all that was being asked of you was that you literally get out of their way. "Out of their way," as in: I am tripping over you while you crouch to take a picture; you are getting run over by a banner while walking backwards slowly; or, I can't get to my friends because you have formed a dense photojournalist forcefield between me and them and the cops who are arresting them for no reason. That last one happened right at the beginning of the march and it definitely escalated the confrontational tone and made people who were already pissed off at the cops now also pissed off at the photographers. Sorry that people acted rashly in the street and wrote stupid communiques about you. They're obviously amateurs at this, but reporting is your job. Just act responsibly and perhaps try to temper the public whining about being pushed around by a few skinny anarchists at a chaotic street demo."

We got a new slogan!!!

Anarchist News — a dumping ground for communiques on the ultraleft

lil pussyholes kick there heads in rob em get paid LOL
liberal objectivity my arse - if they giv that shit 2 my face i fucking do em in. and im not talking about "trading blows" or playing "tug of war" with them im talking about fucking em up, knocking them the fuck out, stabbing em in a alley a bit away or swooping on em with my crew theyll be lucky if they get away on there feet.
You mite have seen videos from our uprizing in the UK of journos getting mugged - just wait till next time no mercy at all. theyre all scum, particularly the liberal fucking muppets. cry about police brutality your just morbid ambulance chasers u fucking scum - you photod Ian tomlinson and went on about it in the papers (how much $$$s per word u cunts??) but thats all. When the feds killed Mark Duggan we rise up everywhere and you scumbags are rite in our sights because you ly about and criminalise us every day - ALL FUCKING NEWSPAPERS - BEAT JOURNOS BLOODY ROB EM FUCK THE MEDIA


In the amount of time it takes to recognize an attacker, produce a handgun from wherever you're carrying it, and turn off the safety, you would probably have already been stabbed several times.

Gun safety tips!

produce a handgun from wherever you're carrying it, and turn off the safety,

i love how tough and "street smart" anarchists pretend to be, but they have zero gun experience and it shows. that's why anarchists attack dangerous windows in the dead of night.

omg you're right, but what i can't figure out is how did you know that the anon you quoted is the official representative of all anarchists?

i means, it's true, he is... it's just... how did you figure it out??!?!!!?!??!!!!

well, anarchists repeatedly keep dangerous windows in check....

not to forget all of the newspaper boxes thrown into the street so that they don't pose a hazard to by-passers on the sidewalk...

i orgasm so hard when i jack off to anarchist tossing newspaper boxes in the street.

Yo I think it's worth noting that, in exchange for telling the press to stay the fuck out of our business, WE REALLY NEED TO STEP UP OUR OWN FORMS OF COMMUNICATING WITH PEOPLE.

People try to articulate themselves to the mainstream media because there doesn't seem to be any other option - which is totally fucking untrue. But we Americans gotta step up (like the Greeks have been doing for years and years, apparently) and just make our own "media". Not that persuading people or being comprehensible/justifiable is the object of our actions or the most important facet of them, but it helps a fucking lot.

it sucks that the only anarchist "media" out there are communiques and defenses of stupid threats made in communiques

Not really true. A good example is The Stimulator on youtube.

There's a guy who travels the world filming radical shit, using resources collected from fans on his own website, has a good relationship with the militants who respect him because he respects them. He tries not to film incriminating shit and when the camera catches it he's very careful about editing the footage to protect the identities of folks involved and BECAUSE everyone knows what he's about, he rarely has a problem when he's filming demos.

The media co-ops across "kkkanada" generally adopt this same attitude.
Like most things, its about respect and knowing the people in your community.

It's also worth noting that in some harder places in the world, corporate whore media gets beat the fuck up and relieved of their cameras all the time.

There's also the really high quality discussions here at @news.

The Stimulator sounds like the name of a new sex toy.

Yeah ... that's the joke. It's a cock pun. It's intentional. Watch his show.

I would prefer a lobotomy.

jose is the shit, and rolls with the ultraleft, at least when he parties

i love jose too, but this article was his worst characteristics in action.

Fuck that rapist piece of shit.

anarchistnews where everyone mentioned anywhere is a rapist or a snitch

some of us are both.

the mostly widely used/abused ad hominem in the milieu. sorry but 'sexual assault' is a virtually meaningless term now. especially with the doctrine of 'retroactive consent' and just the fact that it is an all too convenient way to inflict social death on any cismale person.

just cismale persons? you must have skipped out on the great leaps and bounds made in the past 5 years...

apparently i have, the only great leaps forward i heard about involved leftist feminists attacking male anarchists that radical student occupiers were listening to and getting them kicked out of the milieu.

My one real problem with the take camera's tactic is that it does more harm then good. You prevent the arrest of a few individuals, but you provide the police with an excuse in the public eye to amp up repression. Ultimately, that leads to more arrests then would have happened without the tactic.

when will people finally realize that the police don't need an excuse to amp up repression?

They don't. BUT what this does is get the public more on their side, which legitimatizes them (in their own yes, anyway).

All press is good press?
It strikes me that the point of the Occupy movement is to gain momentum and amass an 'army' of likeminded individuals. Why not use the mainstream media? Free publicity? Isn't the point to gain attention and piss some people off? What better way to cause the beurocrats to sweat in their oxfords than a viral video of black blok (fully masked ie: unidentifiable) torching things?

We don't need any press and we are fully capable of creating our own publicity outside their mediums. The point of Occupy was to IRL troll Wall Street. I can't say what it is now (I decidedly rejected the occupation tactic and haven't participated). I assume it has largely become some sort of "direct democracy in practice" thing for people that have the time to have endless meetings and march around in circles when they aren't attempting to camp in places where the police aren't likely to kick their asses. But perhaps that too has passed. In Columbus, we still have a couple tents in front of the statehouse, which are there legally. The message put out to the MSM is that Occupy is an anti-corruption movement, seeing corporate money as corrupting the politics of government as well as exposing the economic divide between the very rich and the vast majority of American society.

There are obvious exceptions to this, like whatever Occupy Oakland is doing. I'd rather put energies towards less open tactics and continue my avoidance of scenes and public gatherings.

I guess everyone has their own idea on it, but my understanding of what occupy has been about is precisely that journalists and media have been doing a bad job of interpretting the world for us, so let's get together and tell each other what's going on and experience it ourselves rather than having it filtered and presented to us by the media.

Has no one considered the possibility that the assholes are smashing the cameras because they're agent provocateurs and they don't want to be outed?

Furthermore, why don't you folks just WAIT until there aren't a cadre of photographers behind you before you slash some cop tires?

And lastly, if you physically assault a photographer and aren't immediately beaten to a pulp by a phalanx of riot cops, there's a pretty good chance that the person you just attacked wasn't a cop. They are, however, more likely to contribute a story that doesn't put your action in a favorable light.

Then, of course, everyone goes on the internet and complains about how the media always smears anarchists. "All we did was throw paint on this one photog's thousand dollar camera rig, and beat up this one live streamer, and smashed a news company's camera... Y MSM SO UNFRIENDLY 2 US :C"

Repetitive stereotypes in this post:
"Anyone who does stuff that doesn't immediately make sense to me is probably an agent provocateur."
"The media needs an excuse to write negative stories about anarchism."
"If anarchists behaved better, the media would write positive stories about anarchism."

You can't be a respectable media organization with corporate advertisers/investors and a nice relationship with the local politicians and police at the same time that you write articles that are supportive of the people burning banks and police cars.

Of course I considered that. But then this site posted an article demanding that it happen more often, so yeah, it's not the cops... It's anarchists.

I repeat ... in harder places in the world, it's very common for corporate whore media to get rolled and relieved of their cameras.

During the peak of the insurrection in egypt, most of the "journalists" were cowering in their hotel rooms on the 10th floor, scared to film from the balcony, let alone be in the streets. When the streets really kick off, you parasites are the first to run screaming. This relatively MINOR hostility you're beginning to encounter now, is the VERY early stages of that same thing. Get used to it.

TL:DR: you think you're crying now journalists? Just wait.

I am ok with shooting crowds full or rioters like some did in LA to protect themselves. If it came to that, I would do it. You have a human right to be angry and to show your anger, but you have no right, legal or human, to attack me in a violent manner. And if rioters intend to make me hide, they are ridiculous. I will be on the street where I have the HUMAN right to mind my own fucking business and carry a camera and photograph things in public.

If you don't like it, go fuck yourself you anarchist faggot.

anarchy-fagg for short

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Enter the code without spaces.