So now you are not allowed by the law to record/film live violence if you are not a “official” journalist. So if you see a poor ladywomen being raped don’t try to catch the face of the criminal on your cameraphone, you could end up in jail. The broadcasting is also forbidden (hence placine a movie on YouTube too)? Did i miss something? is it the beginning of the end for French citizen journalism? What is the problem? Is this an ethical problem? Is this a political problem?
anyone publishing such images could face up to five years in prison and a fine of €75,000 ($98,537), potentially a harsher sentence than that for committing the violent act
This is obviously shocking our american friends (full discussion on Techmeme), and actually me too. If you ask me the problem is not the filming of violence but the violence itself. Why trying to cure the “wrong” problem?
I wonder what would happen if by law journalists would not be able to blog about whatever they want.
Hi Ouriel,
I think there is a difference between recording and publishing.
In the case you're explaining, catching the face of an agressor is great. Why put it online? Just give to the police...
We admit a "real" journalist (sorry for "real") can stay in front without moving. I think a citizen is commanded by the law to give assistance to someone in danger. If he's recording, no help.
Plus, it will prevent from publishing violence for violence, and make a business with violence. I think that's not so bad, and perhaps a way to treat violence.
(always heard the TV violence made youngs more violent .. so let's give a try and show less violence..)
Posted by: PH Langlois | 08 March 2007 at 10:00 AM
I don't want to justify such a law, but I can see the point : preventing happy slapping.
Posted by: Julien | 08 March 2007 at 10:36 AM
The real point is to prevent happy slapping pratices. But I think you missed something : it is allowed to record violence scenes if your goal is to give it to the police in order to use it as a proof. It is also allowed to use such films for "information purpose" (which is why journalists are allowed to use such films). But filming violence in order to broadcast it online without those motives is now illegal. Anyway, why would you broadcast violence films ?
Posted by: Spica | 08 March 2007 at 11:12 AM
why would journalist do? this law seem to authorize them.
Posted by: ouriel | 08 March 2007 at 12:15 PM
Information purpose. Although I think we don't need those images to be informed...
Posted by: Spica | 09 March 2007 at 10:42 AM