1A Audits

[Lezunto]

blackangst1,

I would not call just anyone wielding a video camera a Journalist.

According to various laws, a person has little expectation of privacy in a public space. However, recording them could be a problem, especially if they are police or other law enforcement.

One of the reasons I responded to your thread the way I did is because you used jargon and then never explained it. That's supposed to be done early.

Real journalists have guidelines and principles they must follow. I had to have a police Press I.D. In New York City, journalists can cross police lines with Working Press I.D's. You guys have any of those?

And if asked, we must identify our sources to editors. It would be unethical to not give our targets a chance to respond before a story goes to print.

If your work appears only on YouTube or as part of a Twitter feed, then you're basically freelance videographers and not Journalists. I don't know where any auditing factors in.

 

[Pohemi]

Normally if I see a thread about something I dont know about I dont respond. Maybe Ill take your queue and ask "Please explain what this is about!"

Sound good?

You keep claiming I'm ignorant on the topic, but it took you almost 50 posts into the thread to show that you yourself knew wtf you were speaking of. I didn't start the thread. Also, it's "cue", not "queue".

Again, maybe next time put your topic info into the OP instead of waiting until you've been asked a dozen times.

Sound good?

 

[blackangst1]

blackangst1,

I would not call just anyone wielding a video camera a Journalist.

OK. Anyone can be an independent journalist. If their business is disseminating news, theyre protected by journalism laws as I commented on on my wall of text post. Who is a "journalist?" - The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (rcfp.org)

The definition of journalist is changing. Even 1A auditors can obtain FOIA requests.

According to various laws, a person has little expectation of privacy in a public space. However, recording them could be a problem, especially if they are police or other law enforcement.

Generally it is not illegal to record LEO. You Have a First Amendment Right to Record the Police | Electronic Frontier Foundation (eff.org)

• You have the right to record police officers exercising their official duties in public.
• Stay calm and courteous.
• Do not interfere with police officers. If you are a bystander, stand at a safe distance from the scene that you are recording.
• You may take photos or record video and/or audio.
• Police officers cannot order you to move because you are recording, but they may order you to move for public safety reasons even if you are recording.
• Police officers may not search your cell phone or other device without a warrant based on probable cause from a judge, even if you are under arrest. Thus, you may refuse a request from an officer to review or delete what you recorded. You also may refuse to unlock your phone or provide your passcode.
• Despite reasonably exercising your First Amendment rights, police may illegally retaliate against you in a number of ways including with arrest, destruction of your device, and bodily harm. We urge you to remain alert and mindful about this possibility.

Real journalists have guidelines and principles they must follow. I had to have a police Press I.D. In New York City, journalists can cross police lines with Working Press I.D's. You guys have any of those?

Very few journalists have press credentials. Additionally, lack of credentials does not disqualify them from being a legitimate journalist. If thats wrong, please provide a link.

And if asked, we must identify our sources to editors. It would be unethical to not give our targets a chance to respond before a story goes to print.

This is irrelevant to 1A auditors. Everyone in the videos are identified.

If your work appears only on YouTube or as part of a Twitter feed, then you're basically freelance videographers and not Journalists. I don't know where any auditing factors in.

Sorry, but YouTube is a legitimate news source. Google "is youtube a legitimate news source" and look at the answers.

 

[Pens1566]

 

[Lezunto]

Blackangst1,

I've had enough of your self-serving poop. You should have explained yourself in the very beginning. But you didn't. You simply displayed an awesome ego that did not match your writing ability.

You are not journalists. You are basically little more than paparazzi hoping to gain fame on YouTube.

Google is a search engine. And YouTube is not a legitimate news source and neither are you.

 

[blackangst1]

Blackangst1,

I've had enough of your self-serving poop. You should have explained yourself in the very beginning. But you didn't. You simply displayed an awesome ego that did not match your writing ability.

You are not journalists. You are basically little more than paparazzi hoping to gain fame on YouTube.

Google is a search engine. And YouTube is not a legitimate news source and neither are you.

The law disagrees with you.

Butt hurt. Thats what you are

 

[Lezunto]

People who cannot write can never hurt me. You are not Journalists. You're just irritants with video cameras trying to pose as muckrakers.

Now, learn to write so you can at least acquit yourselves decently.

And remember to explain yourself upfront, Mr. Video Man with no press identification.

 

[blackangst1]

People who cannot write can never hurt me. You are not Journalists. You're just irritants with video cameras trying to pose as muckrakers.

Now, learn to write so you can at least acquit yourselves decently.

And remember to explain yourself upfront, Mr. Video Man with no press identification.

lmao you dont know what credentials I have or dont have. Troll.

edit: even though...Citizen Journalists: Know Your Rights | Rewire

 

[soundforbjt]

People who cannot write can never hurt me. You are not Journalists. You're just irritants with video cameras trying to pose as muckrakers.

Now, learn to write so you can at least acquit yourselves decently.

And remember to explain yourself upfront, Mr. Video Man with no press identification.

Exactly...see Project Veritas.

 

[HomerJS]

The Left used to be reliable supporters of the 1st Amendment, but not so much anymore. A lot of people make the assertion now that speech is violence, that view is incompatible with a free speech guarantee.

Free speech does not mean freedom from consequences

 

[Lezunto]

Left, right, center ... who cares? Free Speech is no longer free.

It's a rarity because few folks can respond without resorting to invective. They cannot explain themselves. They consider ranting and personal attacks their idea of dialogue.

The immaturity is strong with those who cannot deal with questioning.

If you have the cash, you can purchase ads and access. That's just the way it is. Few are exposing corruption because there's so much to gain from protecting it. Many are in a rush to become famous, because wealth follows.

 

[Paratus]

So for anyone that cares here’s an interesting video (although these Audit the Audit videos are mostly police interaction videos these days)

 

[Vic]

I’ve occasionally watched Audit the Audit on YT where the guy evaluates the behavior of the “auditor” (really the person interacting with the police), and the police officer.

Sometimes it’s pretty eye opening with good and / or bad behavior on both sides.

+1 for Audit the Audit

 

[pmv]

OK. Anyone can be an independent journalist. If their business is disseminating news, theyre protected by journalism laws as I commented on on my wall of text post. Who is a "journalist?" - The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (rcfp.org)

The definition of journalist is changing. Even 1A auditors can obtain FOIA requests.

Very few journalists have press credentials. Additionally, lack of credentials does not disqualify them from being a legitimate journalist. If thats wrong, please provide a link.

Funny how this overlaps so much with the arguments about the US attempts to extradite Assange.

 

[blackangst1]

Funny how this overlaps so much with the arguments about the US attempts to extradite Assange.

I dont see the connection personally.

 

[brandonbull]

Man you still don't know how to use forums. You didn't go to YouTube university to learn how to use a forum? Bigly sad.

So this other person posted a point, and see that little box I posted with their name and their quote inside? It's a quote box. I was responding to them.

Typical conservative, deny basic and obvious reality.

LOL! As if you would know what reality is. It's not your daily Progresshevik Church sermon.

 

[brandonbull]

Some free speech defender you are.

In your case, it's more along the lines of "It's better to be thought an idiot than proven one." Has nothing to do with free speech/1A rights. You are a moron and are happy to prove it.

 

[Meghan54]

In your case, it's more along the lines of "It's better to be thought an idiot than proven one." Has nothing to do with free speech/1A rights. You are a moron and are happy to prove it.

So you like morons a lot? Then I’ve got some posts to show you from King Moron…frequently posts as a loser fla football team.

Seriously, since you are so above the fray and see morons everywhere here, why do you hang out in here? Just like getting your nose rubbed in it like a puppy?

 

[pmv]

Really? There was a whole debate about whether Assange should be counted as a journalist or not.

Julian Assange is an activist, not a journalist | CNN

Frida Ghitis writes that Julian Assange's claim that he is a journalist is false, but that will not preclude authoritarian goverments from using his case to thwart the legitimate media.

edition.cnn.com

This an other CNN pieces push the "not a journalist" line, and also note the many layers of character assassination that the piece indulges in, for example claiming that the elected socialist president of Ecuador, which supported Assange was a "friend of Putin" which is completely nonsensical stuff.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/letters-to-the-editor/mr-assange-is-a-journalist-not-a-hacktivist/2021/07/16/0be2d9d2-e4d4-11eb-88c5-4fd6382c47cb_story.html

Yeah, exactly. The whole thing about the extradition revolved on the question of is it a supression of 'journalism'. And the 'protection of sources'.

I'm not even taking a side, the whole Wikileaks thing still confuses the heck out of me (seems that it in turn was a product of the dishonesty and supression of the truth by the right in the context of the Iraq and Afghan wars - but Assange still looks like a questionable character and Wikileaks seems to illustrate yet again the extreme weakness of the idea that 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'). But just struck me that blackangst1's comments could have come straight out of that argument.

 

[darkswordsman17]

View attachment 67506

I think that's the argument for why the OP wanted to audit age of consent laws. "If its legal its no longer jailbait!"

 

[dawp]

when I saw 1a, I wasn't thinking 1st amendment, was thinking of a 1a phone switch, which I worked on before they were cut.

First Electronic Switch – #1ESS / #1AESS

Western Electric’s first field installation of a fully electronic (computer controlled analog switch) was the #1 Electronic Switching System (#1ESS) at Succasunna, NJ in May 1965.

The #1ESS switching system was designed for areas where large numbers of lines and lines with heavy traffic are served. It generally serves between 10,000 and 65,000 lines. The memory of the 1ESS is generally read only memory (ROM) so that neither software or hardware malfunctions can alter the information content.

The #1ESS was updated in 1976 with the introduction of the 1A processor. #1ESS switches installed in 1976 and beyond were known as #1AESS switches. The 1A processor was designed for local switching applications to be implemented into a working #1ESS switch. It allowed the switching capacity to be doubled from the old #1ESS switches also. The 1A Processor uses both ROM and RAM (Random Access Memory). Magnetic tape units in the 1A Processor allow for system re-initialization as well as detailed call billing functions.

Both the #1ESS and the #1AESS switches use the same peripheral equipment which allows for easy transition. Programs in both switches control routine tests, diagnose troubles, detect and report faults and troubles, and control emergency actions to ensure satisfactory operation. The #1 and #1AESS switches were the first to offer “custom calling features” such as call waiting, three-way calling and speed calling. They also offer business features such as Centrex (PBX-like features but using the regular central office switch).

In the 1990s, the #1AESS was augmented in many central offices with the AT&T 3B20 series of computers as an adjunct processor. This allowed for connection to Signalling System Seven (SS7) networks, Equal Access capabilities, and also allowed for Caller ID to be added to the #1AESS. This gave the switch an extended extra life that would not have been possible without the adjunct computer. There were so many #1AESS switches in service by the early 90s that it made sense to do this until they were eventually all replaced with either digital switches or later with packet switches.

#1AESS Master Control Console

Interestingly enough, the #1AESS was around for so long that it outlived the development of digital switches, as the #5ESS, DMS-100 and EWSD switches were all discontinued by the time the last set of #1AESS switches were removed from the PSTN. Verizon and AT&T made an effort to get rid of all of their #1AESS switches before the end of the 2010s. The last known #1AESS switch was in Odessa, TX (Odessa Lincoln Federal wirecenter ODSSTXLI). It was disconnected from service around June 3, 2017 and cut over to a Genband G5/G6 packet switch.

https://telephoneworld.org/telephone-switching-systems/western-electric-lucent-modern-telephone-switching-systems/

 

[IronWing]

Spoiler tagged messages are legitimate news sources. Trust but verify.

Yes, you can trust news wrapped in spoiler tags. Source verified.

 

[Lezunto]

These phony journalists claim they are uncovering corruption. Bull crap!

They lie and engage in barely ethical activity and claim they are doing the right thing.

One of their number posted a link to Project Vertitas, supposedly to secure bonafides for their assemblage. Well, here's what a court thinks about that nonsense:

Project Veritas Found Liable For Wiretapping, Must Pay $120,000

A jury ruled against the far-right activist group, siding with a Democratic consulting firm that said it was secretly recorded by an undercover operative.

www.huffpost.com

 

[Lezunto]

Pile on? Yeah, why not? It's time the phonies get noticed for what they really do.

Project Veritas loses case to Democratic consulting firm

A jury has ordered the conservative media organization Project Veritas to pay $120,000 after finding it liable for wiretapping and misrepresentation following a yearslong court battle over the outl…

thehill.com

 

[blackangst1]

This video shows one perspective of why need 1A auditors:

Corrupt Cops Get Caught In The Act - YouTube

edit: I understand the video is a result of a lawsuit filed on behalf of the victim (police dash cam)). But its this type of thing 1A auditors catch on video.