Read on Twitter
can't help but think of photography's racist, bourgeois, colonial roots as journalists argue in favor of showing protesters faces, thus potential incriminating them. https://twitter.com/halfatlanta/status/936675783946403842
spectacle and visibility are often violent interactions. documentation is critical in times like these, and these conversations are not new. however state surveillance technology is new, and its methods of administering violence are new, and we have to act accordingly.
any journalist or photographer arguing in favor of showing protesters faces are at best delusional to the conditions of surveillance, policing, and consequences surrounding us; at worst willingly abetting in the potential criminalization of disobedience and countless individuals.
our lenses are not neutral, nor are our words as journalists and reporters apolitical. we have to move and act as if we believe what we say; like we really are up against an imperialist state with some of the world's most sophisticated surveillance technology.
it's not abstract, theoretical, or confusing: either you believe that white supremacists doxx people online constantly, cops have used visual media to arrest protesters and individuals, or you don't. if you believe it, act like it.
the problem with this logic is that it assumes the important work of documentation must hinge upon forced visibility, faces, names, and shouldn't progress into new, safer methods along with our protest tactics.
https://twitter.com/wesleylowery/status/1266254725122420738?s=21 https://twitter.com/wesleylowery/status/1266254725122420738
https://twitter.com/wesleylowery/status/1266254725122420738?s=21 https://twitter.com/wesleylowery/status/1266254725122420738
and i say this as both an organizer and journalist who used to constantly be tasked with documenting/sharing our direct actions in Atlanta online as they were happening. when the stakes are higher, you have to move different.
as crucial as documentation is, we need new methods to maximize effectiveness while reducing harm, the same way organizers constantly try to imagine new methods of direct action. journalists aren't some static, untouchable, neutral observer; they should be constantly adapting too
i should also say, journalists shouldn't treat documenting all protests as equal. the risk level, class and race characters of any direct action should inform how you move and document around it. not all protests and direct action look or mean the same.
