Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Taser Death Video: Can we trust citizen journalists?
Share:
by Barry Artiste | November 17, 2007 at 05:53 am
1990 views | 17 Recommendations | 11 comments
Photos
Citizen Journalists are not restricted versus mainstream media whose news publishers may feel certain embarrassing stories may prevent future access in the case of bias in reporting on political scandals or upset current or potential advertising revenues to the media's organization. Case in point CBS 60 minutes went ahead with an embarrassing political scandal because the CBS reporters and producers were politically biased on their reporting of President Bush's military record.
You've heard of "citizen journalists" -- there's probably no better example these days than Paul Pritchard, the man who videotaped the tragic death of Robert Dziekanski at the Vancouver airport last month.The Victoria resident captured something truly upsetting on the tape, which is now being watched around the world on network television and YouTube.
Dziekanski, a new immigrant from Poland who was apparently lost and afraid after spending 10 hours in a secure area of the airport, finally started acting erratically and was tasered by police. He died shortly thereafter.
That videotape may well change history in Canada; it has certainly refuelled the story and rekindled the debate on tasers and police procedures, among other things.
Expect to see a lot more of this in the future.
Journalists cannot be everywhere, although news organizations have often tried. They know that simply being there can often mean the difference between ignominy and the industry's biggest prizes.
That's why we follow our political leaders around on otherwise dull tours where they give the same old speeches -- we never know when they'll say something different, when someone will do something unscripted or stupid, or when disaster will strike.
The spoils go to those who are there as it happens.
But with staffing forever being cut in the face of corporate realities, we are increasingly not there to see it happen. We "pick up" all kinds of stories after the fact, from those involved, from experts, from eyewitnesses . . .
Enter the citizen journalist.
Despite the skepticism of many in the business, including me, it's easy to see in cases such as this how valuable they are.
Some question whether this kind of footage can be trusted, and that professional journalists are better able to present a more accurate picture of events.
Who knows for sure, but it's clear the origin of such videos won't change the fact that viewers interpret the footage differently.
The Pritchard video is a case in point: at least one respondent to the Editor's Blog at lfpress.com says the film merely shows the police were doing their jobs well in difficult circumstances. Many others have said it proves the police acted improperly.
So as citizen journalists multiply, they'll learn what journalists have known since they started out in the business: different people interpret the same event differently and each eyewitness has a different perspective.
This was apparent way back in 1963, when the world was introduced to Abraham Zapruder, perhaps the continent's most famous citizen journalist, long before the moniker was even invented.
It was Zapruder who got the best footage of the assassination of John F. Kennedy in Dallas (despite the presence nearby of about three dozen other photographers, most of them professionals).
His short amateur film has been viewed by millions, was at the centre of a presidential commission, and was analyzed six ways to Sunday, but what it reveals remains highly contested.
That, as much as anything, illustrates the true challenge of journalism, citizen or otherwise. Paul Pritchard, who is now said to be considering a career in journalism, may find out soon enough.
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
Barry Artiste
Vancouver, Canada
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (11)
at 06:24 on November 17th, 2007
Barry-- This is awesome. The quote, "Expect to see a lot more of this in the future." is an UNDERSTATEMENT!
I would put money on it that the MSM will be a thing of the past by the time I'm retired. I think citizen journalism is excellent and I hope that this phenomenom will rage like a wild fire. I also think it gets people involved in their communities and become a part of social issues that they never would have done otherwise.
I know, because that is what happened to me! It's been 2.5 years and counting...won't be stopping either!
Good job as always Barry.
at 07:58 on November 17th, 2007
Hi Michelle, a slight disagreement here. I doubt MSM will vanish, for many good reasons.
Right now, sometimes a citizen is in the right place at the right time. I.E., they're a witness, just as citizens have always been. The difference is that now citizens have tools like video cams and cellphone cams, so they have documentation to their witnessing.
And it's a valuable piece of the pie. However, most CJ's aren't equipped, or don't want to, take the actual physical risks that come with journalism. Not only from being in dangerous places, but also doing dangerous things with dangerous people.
Most CJ's also can't finance the deep stuff. For example, one investigation I did took me almost a year (while covering my normal stuff, too). There is no way that an average person can afford to fund a lot of research for deep subjects, especially investigations. And, there's also the matter of contacts, and the relationships built through repeated personal contacts.
Journalism isn't as easy as pointing a camera one time, or blogging, frankly. It's a dedication, and a demanding profession.
This isn't in any way to say that CJ isn't important and valuable, because it is. But I think of it holistically, with each piece of the information processs having its own share, and its own importance. Believe me, as a journalist who's worked off citizen tips before, I can say that it would have been great to have photos or recordings as part of the tip!
CJ input keeps the MSM and professional J community on its toes, too, which is a very good thing. One of the key things I think I see developing: reliability, as Barry points out, of CJ. In these emerging period of CJ growth, just a few faked or altered vids or photos could really hurt the process.
Like you, I think there's a lot of potential still to come! But I see it as a collaborative process. I notice that most really good MSM welcomes CJ, and moved quickly to be inclusive.
at 07:38 on November 17th, 2007
We see MSM as somehow more legitimate because it's on the television, and in the daily paper (both one-way discussions). We've been hard-wired to accept this, but there's no real basis for it, as your examples above show.
at 07:46 on November 17th, 2007
Barry Artiste, good stuff.
I have some questions about that incident. Since the man was acting disoriented, did they consider anything medical?
Is the autopsy done? Was the taser the cause of death? Or the diabetes? (Wasn't that his medical problem?) Or the officer on the neck?
And some really big important questions: what model were they using? Was it an actual Taser or something else? I thought it was very peculiar how they were holding him and "tasering" him. The ones I've seen shoot little darts with electrical connections. YOu don't hold onto someone AND taser them at the same time.
And, what is going on in Vancouver? Are the officers required to have special training with Tasers or other "stun"tools? Around here, any officer carrying a Taser has to go through special training, be certified--and oh yes, be tasered himself/herself (no protective vest) so they understand what it does. And every dart, every usage, must be accounted for, and an explanation given why it was used--just like with a gun.
Are the officers there just routinely issued Tasers or similiar implements? And what about that "tasering" while sitting one someone's neck? That doesn't wash with me, from what I've seen and read.
at 08:27 on November 17th, 2007
Good question Pep, my comments outside the main story were my own personal views as a human health risk assessor and centered on possible emotional and medical conditions, as well as lack of food, (which can be dangerous for someone who judging by a possiuble eastern european diet and his obvious weight, I feel he may have suspect diabetes), the man smoked, so a nicotine fit can exacerbate his emotional state in a non smoking airport, 10 hour flight compounded with the additional 10 hour wait at customs, lack of sleep, nervousness in a new country, excited state not being able to understand the language or canadian culture, missing his mom. My own conclusion is the Taser alone didn't kill him, when all these other factors are taken into consideration. But I assure everyone the combination of all of the above with 4 burly officers attacking him, with one or two with their combined weight on his head and back and restricting his breathing likely killed him, and certainly the Tasering may have gotten him hyperventilating and with lack of respiratory function with officers on top of him may be the cause of his demise. The Tasering certainly didn't help in a distress situation resulting in a "Coup De Grace" without mercy.
But that is just my opinion. As for officers training in a Taser, of course, whether all officers get a taste of the taser, I doubt it. The officers did not hold him down and taser him, from what I know.
There are more human restraint systems out there, such as foam, hell even a german shepherd on a leash barking with teeth bared may have averted all this.
Though I have never been tasered in training, I have certainly experienced similar body shocks in excess of 60,000 volts (with little or near zero amperage) more than a dozen times in my career, let me just say, flyback transformers can be a bitch to test, repair and validate in the lab.
at 10:49 on November 17th, 2007
Seedplanter, I will not dignify this with a response.
at 11:16 on November 17th, 2007
Good Stuff.
Let me play the devils advocate for a minute Barry:
In part, you said:
"Case in point CBS 60 minutes went ahead with an embarrassing political scandal..." Who is claiming to be embarrassed? For what reason? Is this a time to dig further for information? Is it a media station/newpapper or some political; "other"?
Perhaps I should meekly apologise and delete what I was writing? Perhaps not!
How much mainstream "news" is usually watered down, or suppressed and then sanitized before being published as fact?
If we think that there is the possibility that "not all news is treated equally' then Citizen Jounalists surely have a place in this aspect of social liberation.
I would suggest that tampered video, or unclear, or misleading "facts" would very quickly be corrected by the ethical writers in the community, and honest errors would be acknowledged by an author who rushed a piece through the edit stage of writng before publishing.
However, citizen journalism remains vulnerable as long as the need for control of the internet by vested corporate interests remains a reality.
Historically "citizen" anything was taboo; in education; commerce; religion; etc; expressions of control then, as now, were similar to the gentry declaring that "such activities as freedom of association is better discouraged because the masses are entirely irresponsible for what they might say next...!
Which brings me back to the point of "who is embarrassed, and why"?
Who knows, society might become a better place because of the audacity of citizen journalist' to raise their defiant heads.
So, my friend(s) keep writing.
Peter.
peter.reardon
at 11:43 on November 17th, 2007
Thanks, Peter. I agree with you and PEP: I think that witness-reported footage is ultimately part of the info-ecosystem, and a crucial part thereof, if for no other reason (and there *are* other reasons) than to gently remind our boom-mic-carrying cohabitants that we do, indeed, exist, and are watching.
at 13:14 on November 17th, 2007
Peter in your response to your question regarding 60 minutes, I had always believed they had integrity, slowly over the last few years it has become apparent that they are slipping into redundancy, they (Rather) really did not have to make stuff up about Buch to put him in a bad light, he did that on his own, and the recent interview I think with Leslie Stahl's Mauryesque interview tactics with the French president smacked of ratings sensationalism. Though citizen journalism is not perfect as policiing is somewhat dificult in litigation issues, it is still nice top have people placed all over the world reporting on stories. On the other hand, our Vancouver Sun has a readership of lets say one million readers all local. Now Public is global and has the potential to be seen by millions and millions of readers and all for free. Something I would think mainstream media dream about and cannot compete with Now Public. Now Public reporters and contributors are hassle free in some respects with contributors who provide world wide reporting free of bias, just the facts, with an opinion or two thrown in from the contruibutor for good measure.
As for Seedplanter, my indignant response is to your statement on you working on flyback transformers, apparently you are so unaware of the type ad potential I speak of, when getting hit with a bank of them for much longer than a few milliseconds from a Hydrogen Reactor, you truly have never experienced it. As for my comments on the Taser, certainly it is an abhorent tactic the officers used, not once, but twice. All I was stating is that a combination of horrendous acts against this man resulting in his death in which a combination of circumstances killed him, and I feel he may have died even without being Tasered. With the Tasering adding insult to an even graver and fatal injury.
And no I have no illusions of being a leader in reporting, as I am a leader in my chosen field, and that is in environmental human health, human engineering , and human risk assessment. Something I know you have shown to everyone your lack of knowledge and experience in which to further comment on.
In ending, I have rolled up the newspaper and am considering placing a lead pipe inside it, just for you.
at 09:55 on November 19th, 2007
A few days back I suggested it would be useful to find out death rates from police gun shootings as opposed to
Taser related deaths over a similar period . In other words do the "non lethal" claims stack up ?
Do cops more readily use Tasers because theyve been sold the idea that they're , supposedly , not lethal ?
I'd think someone must know the answers !
However on checking tonight I see no answers , but quite a bit of petty squabbling between people who should know better .
The only way to end this Taser nonsense is to show the Legislators that it's a bad thing that is not really effective .
That people are dying who wouldn't have died if a cop had to face the sort of questions that are raised by a police shooting .
The fact that a number of Canada's Finest together couldn't restrain one frightened unarmed man without resorting to a Taser
is frankly an indictment of their training , and their attitude .
However , being in Australia , I am not in a position to get the answers myself .
at 15:50 on November 19th, 2007
Rooboy, thanks for the comment, you pretty much stated it all in one sentence, it seems "Cops more readily use Tasers because theyve been sold the idea that they're , supposedly , not lethal ?