Census Bureau Suspends Free Press...

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Perhaps you should forfeit your Stars and Flags that were blindly awarded to the original false title. But nice try.

[edit on 2-5-2010 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by kinda kurious


Care to debate the topic? I haven't changed anything in the OP.

Edit to add: Stars and flags? You think that is what this is about? I guess you don't want to debate a serious subject if you do... Heck you can have all I've ever gotten and all the points I've ever gotten too in all the time I've been here, not just this thread... I seriously don't care about them at all.

[edit on 2/5/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Read my first reply. Buh bye.

Originally posted by kinda kurious
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

 

Perhaps you should forfeit your Stars and Flags that were blindly awarded to the original false title.

But nice try.

[edit on 2-5-2010 by kinda kurious]

The original title WAS NOT false... I just changed the title so that the thread wouldn't get derailed.

The title was Obama Administration Suspends Free Press. What part of that is false? Do you deny the Census Bureau is contained in the Obama Administration or, more to the topic, that this suspends the free press?

You're making a mountain out of a molehill here. This addendum exists to save your free press from countless lawsuits and potential jail time for offending reporters.

You ever wonder why, when the "paparazzi" is camped outside some boorish celebrity's home, they're camped outside the property line of said celebrity? It's called trespassing...

The free press ends where my right to privacy begins. If a newspaper reporter or camera crew from the local news station sets foot onto my property unsolicited, regardless of who they're tailing (census worker for example), they're trespassing and I can have them arrested. This is not up for debate, it's a matter of media law that every journalism major becomes intimately familiar with. It's not to quash free press, it's to protect the rights to privacy of the citizenry...

The census beureau is exempt because of the very proviso in the Constitution you're attempting to use as ammunition.

reply to post by Legion2112


What makes you think that the press would be trespassing anyway? You, yourself said that that's what the paparazzi do.. camp out, outside of the property. Why would you think that any of the press would do anything differently?

Originally posted by Legion2112
The free press ends where my right to privacy begins. If a newspaper reporter or camera crew from the local news station sets foot onto my property unsolicited, regardless of who they're tailing (census worker for example), they're trespassing and I can have them arrested. This is not up for debate, it's a matter of media law that every journalism major becomes intimately familiar with.

Yes you can and yes you should. I agree entirely.

It's not to quash free press, it's to protect the rights to privacy of the citizenry...

My question remains, why does the press need protecting with a mandate that diminishes their rights? Why do citizens need protecting when they can and should call the police if the press comes on their property unwanted?


[edit on 2/5/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Umm... okay, now I'm confused. From my POV you just explained why the press shouldn't be allowed to tag along with census workers in the field... they'd be tresspassing and violating privacy rights... since what census workers do in the field is go from house to house...

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
Perhaps they are asking too many personal questions.... maybe they should just stick with "enumeration". I don't think too many people would be worried about a television crew answering the question "how many people live here".

The last thing I would want is a camera crew standing on my porch while I tell a census taker how many adults and children live in my house. What if I'm a single woman living alone? What if I'm a single mother with small children in the home? Do you really think it's a good idea to have a camera crew there to record that information? It would put me at the top of the list for break-ins or worse. Brilliant idea right there.

reply to post by Jenna


See, that's the thing - legally, no camera crew can do that unsolicited - i.e., without your prior approval. Which is why IMO this thread serves no purpose other than to rile people up for the sake of riling people up. The provision in current census laws prohibiting the press from "tagging" along with a census taker in the field simply reinforces existing laws regarding privacy and tresspassing, nothing more.

reply to post by Legion2112


Pretty much, yes. Just disputing the claim that people wouldn't mind having a camera crew on their porch while they answer census questions.

Am I supposed to be surprised?
The current regime wants to suppress it's own sheeple.
And they are willing to ask for their own Pelosi wants fellow Dems) to sacrifice their political career, to further the regime's agenda.

Originally posted by Legion2112
reply to post by Jenna

 

See, that's the thing - legally, no camera crew can do that unsolicited - i.e., without your prior approval. Which is why IMO this thread serves no purpose other than to rile people up for the sake of riling people up. The provision in current census laws prohibiting the press from "tagging" along with a census taker in the field simply reinforces existing laws regarding privacy and tresspassing, nothing more.

This provision is NOT in census laws – it has NOT gone through Congress and it DOES violates the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. It is a new mandate from the Census Bureau (the federal government) to the press (private enterprise) that tells them what they can cover and what they can’t. Do you really want the federal government telling the press what they can cover and what they can’t cover? Really????

You stated yourself that there are current laws ALREADY IN PLACE to protect citizens from unwanted people on their property. Right?

The reason this “riles me up” is because it is one more degradation of our Constitutional rights. Since you don’t mind the government degrading our 1st amendment rights, please tell me which ones you want to keep and which ones you can do without.

Originally posted by Jenna
The last thing I would want is a camera crew standing on my porch while I tell a census taker how many adults and children live in my house. What if I'm a single woman living alone? What if I'm a single mother with small children in the home? Do you really think it's a good idea to have a camera crew there to record that information? It would put me at the top of the list for break-ins or worse. Brilliant idea right there.

I agree, I don’t want press standing on my doorstep either. I would politely ask them to leave and if they didn’t, I would call the police. That’s all it takes… and THAT doesn’t infringe on anyone’s rights.

I would love to see someone in the press test this. In fact I would contribute to their legal defense fund if they got arrested for it. It would never pass a legal test and would send a message.

Alright dude, I give up. You win. This provision, which doesn't impede the press any more than existing privacy laws already do, is yet another example of a big brother takeover and we're all going to be living in FEMA camps by June...

Give yourself an aneurysm over this if you wish. I've got better things to do.

Peace out...

I went and found the actual media guidelines on the Census website. No where does it say "expressly forbidden". I went to your source and tried to find an image or a link to this supposed letter. I found nothing.

For your viewing pleasure:

Media Guidelines

THE LAW PROTECTS RESPONDENT CONFIDENTIALITY
The U.S. Census Bureau knows that privacy and confidentiality are critical to ensuring a complete and accurate 2010 Census count. Title 13 of the U.S. Code guarantees respondents that their personal information will be kept confidential. Census workers swear an oath for life not to divulge any respondent information. Therefore, the Census Bureau adheres to the strict procedures to ensure the protection of respondent information as required by Federal law.

As applied to the media, this means that no reporter, photographer or video crew is permitted to directly observe or record any activities or documents dealing with material covered by Title 13.

From the Census' page on Title 13:

Title 13 Protections

* Private Information is Never Published
It is against the law to disclose or publish any private information that identifies an individual or business such as:
o No names
o No addresses including GPS Coordinates
o No Social Security Numbers
o No telephone numbers

Nowhere can I find anything saying that the media are expressly forbidden to do anything. What I found was a pdf on the Census website that points to a federal law and says that's why the media can't follow census takers around.

The author of that blog is looking for a reason to have a fit if you ask me. No new rules were made, the Census bureau isn't making up new laws for the media to follow, nor are they taking away any Consitutional rights. They're pointing at a law and saying "You can't tape any census workers on doorsteps because it violates federal law".

Media following people around will reveal what neighborhoods and possibly what addresses census workers have been to at the least. Both of which qualify as protected information when it comes to the census. Instead of making mountains out of molehills, how about we focus on true violations of the Constitution. Heaven knows there are enough of them out there that new ones don't need to be made up.

reply to post by Legion2112


I can tell you really don't care about this issue and that's ok. I do care though because I see so many rights being taken away little by little by little. Yeah, this may be a little thing right now, but when does it stop? I'm afraid "never" is the answer to that question and I'm afraid for what it's going to be like for my children.

You don't have to care but don't try to tell me that this isn't of consequence because every little thing like this that comes along is of consequence when added together. It's a trend. I was always taught that we live in a society governed by the rule of law not by the rule of people. I personally have a lot invested in the idea that this is the correct way of being. If we aren't diligent, we will become a society governed by the rule of people and not the rule of law.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

I can tell you really don't care about this issue and that's ok. I do care though because I see so many rights being taken away little by little by little. Yeah, this may be a little thing right now, but when does it stop? I'm afraid "never" is the answer to that question and I'm afraid for what it's going to be like for my children.

You are trying to create drama where there is none. This isn't about suspending the free press, it's about protecting the privacy of citizens. Pick your battles better, as there are certainly plenty of other issues worth fighting over these days.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

I can tell you really don't care about this issue and that's ok. I do care though because I see so many rights being taken away little by little by little. Yeah, this may be a little thing right now, but when does it stop? I'm afraid "never" is the answer to that question and I'm afraid for what it's going to be like for my children.

You are trying to create drama where there is none. This isn't about suspending the free press, it's about protecting the privacy of citizens. Pick your battles better, as there are certainly plenty of other issues worth fighting over these days.

Originally posted by NightGypsy
You are trying to create drama where there is none. This isn't about suspending the free press, it's about protecting the privacy of citizens. Pick your battles better, as there are certainly plenty of other issues worth fighting over these days.

See, I just feel that we have enough "protections" already without having to add to them. I don't need any more government "protections" especially when they limit the protection I have from the government. That may sound "over the top" to you but I see so many rights taken from us in an attempt to protect us that I'm fed up with it all. I'm not trying to create drama, perhaps that's the way it comes across, if so then my apologies but we all have our own passions. Yours is something else and that's cool, but protecting the rights we have left is one of mine.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


I'm sorry, this is ludicrous, and I have to wonder at the veracity of the information.

This is about the Federal Government actually defending Civil Rights of citizens.

Not about infringing upon one single one of anyone.

The Census is not some arbitrary story where reporters are writing about it.

Obviously, the legislation, was written, to assist in enforcing our Civil Rights.

That anyone should follow someone while they are working, Federal Government, or a regular job, is sort of as stupid as allowing a dog to chase a car.

It is first and foremost, disruptive, to the person trying to do their job.

It is second and most important, a clear violation of our rights to privacy, if a reporter is following a Census Bureau worker everywhere they go.

This blogger you're quoting, is quite obvious, a complete moron and has no brains.

And I believe you are feigning innocence to sell your thoughts on a bogus article.

You know exactly that a Census worker is there to collect information, so a person of the press being there, is literally an infringement upon a citizens rights.

What the blogger does not realize is this is clearly the Government assisting in keeping our information private, something they do not always do, and I believe they should be commended for defending our rights, for one of the few time it happens.

I am not defending the Census and or collecting information and a newspaper does not have more rights than an independent citizen, just more money and lies.

[edit on 2-5-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]