top
East Bay
East Bay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Live Streamers Make Great Informants

by WeCopwatch
There are many ways to effectively document the movement while protecting the space, its movements and people’s privacy. Live Streaming is generally NOT one of them.

A common issue with Streamers is their display of entitlement, often citing the value of bringing the movement to the people. But Streamers have a hard time admitting that the police find their work more valuable then demonstrators.
800_screen_shot_2014-12-19_at_9.45.33_am.jpg
In a world of voyeurism and exhibitionists, Streamers often get carried away, interpreting their role as being a narrator for the movement. They often film people without their consent, placing more value in presenting to their viewership, then protecting the group that is already taking risks by just getting out into the street to protest.

One of the biggest problems with streaming is that it gives real time information to the police as far as what people are present, the group’s intentions, as well as its location and routes. Embedded Streamers give police a tactical advantage when trying to conduct mass arrests.

An even more tragic contract Streamers impose on demonstrators is the raw, unedited, archived video that is often made public and available online for law enforcement to use later to help identify and target people.

Before we move to “Streamer Solutions” lets review some “Streamer tactics” that are favorable to law enforcement, and almost always at the expense of the people.

Very Poor Streamer Etiquette

Calling People out by Name on Streams.
People don’t go to protests for other people to call them on streams that are put up permanently online for law enforcement to review.

Filming People’s Identities on Streams
Law enforcement use streams to target and identify people for repression and arrest

Narrating your Interpretation of what Kind of Action is Taking Place.
Streamers often divulge personal opinions rather than facts when narrating about actions. Are you prepared to be a witness for law enforcement in the future?

Filming Direct Actions
Everything you film, can and will be used against protesters if law enforcement has anything to do with it.

Narrating Logistics and Tactics
At the height of Occupy Oakland, Undercovers were being called into certain FTP protests because of the “no Live Streaming” / “no Twittering” tactic.

FTP marches are ongoing Fuck the Police marches that take place in Oakland and Across the Bay

Narrating Group Routes
Police have a much easier time arresting people in the streets when they have Streamers narrating the group’s routes. You don’t need Undercovers and Helicopters when you have a front row seat.

If you want to be helpful to the movement, be honest about your intentions. Is your viewership more important than the people you are standing with? Do you want to be doing something that benefits the police over the people?Every action, every mass mobilization has a story that can be told. But folks need either start holding “non streaming” actions again, or streamers should stop operating as informants for the police.

If any of these issues are concerning to you, maybe consider NOT “Live Streaming” your next protest. Pick up a still camera, conduct some audio interviews, heck shoot some video. There’s no reason why you can’t go home after a protest and produce some content that is useful and not harmful. But incase its not in your blood to consider other people on that level, here’s some good Live Stream tactics.

“Good” Livestream Tactics
Stand hundreds of feet away from the group so the low quality recording doesn’t pick up conversations or people’s identity.
Don’t film people’s identify without their consent.
Don’t narrate intentions, tactics, locations, or destinations.
Wear a bright shirt that says “Live Streamer” or “Informant”.

More "Real Good" Livestream Tactics
Live Stream an event, panel, or discussion where all parties consent.
Live Stream a demo or action where all parties involved consent.
Live Stream your interactions when being stopped, questioned, or harassed by law enforcement. (maybe put your channel on private!)

Be safe out there, and make it safer for the masses by considering them when you point a camera at them.
Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by K. Malik
There is no source given for the screenshot.

Also, this implies that only Jacob Crawford is the only legitimate videographer.

http://www.wecopwatch.org/about/
by hank chapot
Live streaming may present a problem for direct action, but I am more concerned and have been wondering about the high altitude helicopter that was monitoring the marches. I was out there a few times, and saw the low flying helicopter going round and round and spotlighting the crowds, it was probably a local police or sheriff or CHP machine. But I kept seeing a high altitude helicopter that was perfectly fixed and unmoving, like GPS still, hovering over the marches.

Who was that? Homeland security, the military? And what were they recording. Heat-sensing, facial recognition, all cell phone activity?

Somebody should investigate that helicopter along with investigating live-streamers.
by Vert
The problem with copwatch is that as technology advances, their organization is needed less, and they as members have less standing in activist circles... so they often critique everyone around them who is doing copwatching without their 'permission'.

WeCopWatch's argument is inherently flawed. The screenshot provided by Crawford doesn't talk about livestreaming, it mentions gathering data on the ground directly from undercover operatives, not gathering data from livestreamers. The police are already there, already in the thick of things, they don't need to observe livestreams. Also they have helicopters with high-powered cameras.

Livestreaming directly captures moments of police violence and other forms of police abuse. Livestreaming prevents police from taking footage, as everything is being uploaded and saved online; even if they police grab a smarthphone, they can't delete livestream footage, but that can delete footage from a standard camera. Livestreaming helps people join marches and actions, because people can see where they are taking place - particularly helpful in marching situations where the protest moves around.

Some livestreamers are valid independent media, and have press badges and have every right to be observing. It is ridiculous and insulting to demand that livestreamers refer to themselves as informants and it is asinine to demand that independent journalists wear shirts that say informant.

WeCopWatch's article sounds more like jealousy and anger about not being needed. Only CopWatch may watch cops... everyone else is just in the way, or actively working for the police. WeCopWatch needs to get over themselves.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$210.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network