The U.S. Court Of Appeals has made a unanimous decision in the case of Glik v. Cunniffe; The First Circuit ruled after a long and arduous process that Glik was protected under his first amendment rights when he recorded three officers arrest someone, when he saw hints of brutality. Glik was brought up on three criminal charges. After having his charges dropped, Glik still felt wronged, it was time for revenge. “Glik filed suit in federal court against the officers and the City of Boston under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act” (Hermes, 2011). Judge Young ruled that Glik was protected under the first amendment because he recorded the police in a public place, Boston Common. The judge also ruled that Glik’s 4th amendment rights were violated for being arrested without probable cause.
What’s interesting about this case is that Glik was not part of a media outlet. He was an individual, a good Samaritan, trying to do what was right for society. What is the role of new technology? Now any Joe-Shmo can record anything that is public, legally under the first amendment, which makes it possible for anyone to now break a news story. It doesn’t take a news team in a van anymore, it can be you or me who breaks the next big story, it just depends who can unlock their phone faster.
What’s interesting about this case is that Glik was not part of a media outlet. He was an individual, a good Samaritan, trying to do what was right for society. What is the role of new technology? Now any Joe-Shmo can record anything that is public, legally under the first amendment, which makes it possible for anyone to now break a news story. It doesn’t take a news team in a van anymore, it can be you or me who breaks the next big story, it just depends who can unlock their phone faster.
No comments:
Post a Comment