The photographer WAS NOT HARASSED!

[jgalyon]

<p>(before I begin....being the computer illiterate that I am, I have no idea why, but I'm getting some strange spacing in submitting this thread that I can't seem to be able to correct. please excuse...)</p>

<p>It’s easy enough to find threads related to photographers alleging harassment by various law enforcement agencies for taking photographs of “security sensitive” areas such as: bridges, power plants, federal buildings, airports, etc. - not quite as easy to find accounts where there was no clash between the two.<br /><br />So, for a change of pace I thought I’d offer an account of cooperation between the photographer and the powers that be .</p>

<p><br />I live within eyesight of the Sequoyah Nuclear plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The plant is owned by TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) , which is a federally owned corporation that supplies most of the electricity for the states of Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, and seven other states from South Carolina to Indiana. For some time now I have been wanting to photograph the two huge cooling towers at Sequoyah, but have always put it off because of my assumption that it mi ght be more hassle than it would be worth. It has always been my understanding that it is legal to photograph such sites as long as it is from public or private property…and of course, that you are not using the photographs for some type of subversive purpose. Last week I finally decided to contact TVA to get their official stance on the matter.<br />I first e-mailed the Director of TVA Nuclear Communications, Terry Johnson. Mr. Johnson replied and asked that I call him to discuss th e matter at a time of my convenience. I calle d him a couple of days later and we spoke for close to a half hour.Instead of boring you with all the details, I’ll give the summarized version of the conversation.</p>

<p>According to Mr.Johnson, the mere photographing of TVA facilities (nuclear or otherwise) from private or public land…is not illegal. On the other hand, (and it should go without saying...but I will anyway) if y ou’re photographing the sites for the purpose of aiding in the planning of an illegal activity such as sabotage…i t is quite illegal.<br>

I asked Mr.Johnson what I might exp ect to occur if security guards observed me stopping along the public highway near the plant to take photograph s. In essence, he said that I shouldn’t be surprised if I were to be approached by the guar ds, who would most likely ask for my identification and my purpose for photographing the site. He stated that as long as I were compliant with those two requests, and assuming there was nothing “suspicious” about my behavior…that this should be the end of the matter and that I should be free to continue. However, he made th e offer to meet with me at the site to assure that no problems would arise. As it turns out, Mr.Johnson lives very c lose to my home…so he related that it wouldn’t be any trouble for him to meet with me at Sequoyah. I th anked him for his willingness to meet with me, but went on to ask if he thought it would work just as well if he were to contact the guards at the plant entrance, make them aware that I would be taking the photographs at a s peci fic time, and then I could simply drop by the guard station and present my identification. He said that he had no problem with that p lan and welcomed me to contact him when I was ready to set a time and date.<br>

　<br>

I have to say that prior to calling I was prepared for a lot of blah, blah, blah, PR double- speak, evasiv e answers, and maybe even some “it’s not illegal…but you won’t ...if you know what’s good for you”…type of subtle insinuation. But it just didn’t happen. In fact, our talk r ates near the top of my list of most positive business conversations I’ve ever experienced. Of course, if y ou don’t hear from me again…and the only trace of me that is left is found in some obscure Google s earch that results in the mention of a photographer being arrested near a nuclear plant in Tennessee…you'll know that my confidence in this official’s word was misguided ;) But...I feel I have no reas on to expect problems. Mr.Johnson did relate that he was glad that I had called rather than simply showing u p at the plant unannounced. Although he didn't say so directly, the implication was that although I would hav e been within my legal rights to do so, that first, communicating with the appropriate person s makes it muc h more likely that&nb sp;a neg ative inciden</p>

[jgalyon]

<p>(continued computer probs)....continued from above: ...much more likely that no "negative" incident would occur. Our conversation was quite encouraging to me in the sense that it shows that preserving the Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens don't have to clash with policy dealing with national security concerns. I'd be interested to hear if any of you have experienced similar conversations with positive results.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"I first e-mailed the Director of TVA Nuclear Communications..."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That alone differentiates it completely from most anecdotes recounted here and elsewhere online and in no way negates the anecdotes that allege (or, in some cases, actually document) experiences with harassment, intimidation or prior restraint. Most previous accounts and anecdotes involve spontaneous or candid photography.</p>

[jgalyon]

<p>Lex, Just to be clear...I had no intention of sounding as though I was attempting to negate the many accounts of harassment toward photographers. In fact, I experienced such harassment by security guards at the Port of Charleston (South Carolina) two years ago...and it was the only time in my fifty something years of life that I got just a small taste of what it would be like to live in a country where the citizens have no rights...and it was a very sickening feeling.</p>

[spanky]

<p>You did the right thing. When in doubt, always talk to whoever is in charge. I've been given permission to shoot in indoor shopping malls, outdoor shopping malls, cafeterias, etc. In my bag I carry a copy of an email sent to me by a PR person for MTA stating it's perfectly OK to shoot in the subway trains and stations. Recently on a flight out of town, I not only was I given permission to shoot planes on the runway and around the various gates, but I was thanked for asking. Really, a little diplomacy goes a long way. In fact, now that I think about it, I don't think I was ever turned down when asking the powers that be for permission to photograph in the areas they have control over. When in doubt ask permission. It really makes life so much easier and who wouldn't want that?</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Your experience with the TVA seems to confirm the adage that it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission.</p>

<p>I had a similar experience a few years ago when photographing the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth. The experience is noteworthy only because it proves nothing.</p>

<p>I'd already photographed the museum several times, inside and out, during the early to mid 2000s. When inside I didn't tote a tripod - including when photographing the outdoor pond, which is accessible only by walking through the museum. Never a problem.</p>

<p>Outdoors, I'd photographed the grounds and, of course, the distinctive outdoor metal sculpture. And I'd seen many photographers use the public access areas of the grounds during and after operating hours for personal and even business photography - I've seen pros set up with models on the grounds in the evenings. Never a problem.</p>

<p>During the early 2000's, after the 9/11 incidents, I noted an increase in the number of posts, here on photo.net and elsewhere, complaining about harassment, intimidation, prior restraint and censorship. As a former journalist, naturally this concerned me. I decided to test it for myself.</p>

<p>I deliberately engaged in "suspicious" activities, including trying to behave "furtively", in public. Mostly, people laughed or grinned at me. Sometimes they asked - even demanded - that I take their photographs. Apparently, I'm not nearly as intimidating as I'd like to believe. The only time I experienced a specific incident of restraint by a law enforcement official was in Savannah in 2004 during the G8 summit at Sea Island (which I've recounted at least twice before on photo.net, so I'll skip the specifics).</p>

<p>Around 2004 or so I decided to try the "ask permission" approach at the Modern Art Museum in Fort Worth. Specifically, I asked for permission to photograph the grounds while I was standing outside on the public sidewalks (most of the museum grounds are readily visible from surrounding public areas.) I asked inside at the museum for permission. I was given a lot of contradictory information, mostly inaccurate and not based on any written policy and certainly not enforceable. Basically, they told me I could not photograph the museum without permission. I thanked them very politely for their time, left, a immediately began photographing the museum exterior, precisely as I had described, from public areas, just to see if a security guard or police officer would be sent to question me. Nope. Nothing happened.</p>

<p>Long story short, we're all blind men describing an elephant.</p>

<p>The folks who continually jump into these types of discussions to pooh-pooh concerns about restrictions are usually blind men who've only encountered the elephant's trunk. They live in photographer-friendly places and have been lucky enough to escape unpleasant experiences. Some of 'em live in theme-park worlds full of exhibitionists who are hoping to be photographed, videoed and blogged. Great gig if you can get it.</p>

<p>The folks who continually jump in with horror stories about harassment are blind men who've been unlucky enough to be near the elephant's ass where they got pooped on. So their version of the story gives the impression that the elephant always stinks. And a few folks have been trampled on because they were too close to the creature's huge feet. Not every city or town regards itself as a theme park begging to be documented for some street photographer's blog, book or documentary project. Walker Evans learned that lesson, as did many others, long before the 9/11 scare.</p>

<p>But none of us has the full, unbiased story. We're just a bunch of blind men around an elephant.</p>

[Brad_]

And then there are some (actually many) who shoot on the street a lot and from experience rely on common sense,

behavior, attitude, confidence, good people skills to come through with no significant incidents in many cities and wide variety of circumstances. It's not a matter of luck...

[spanky]

<p>I take that back. I was denied shooting a Clippers half time show at Staples Center, a college football game at the Rose Bowl, and at a church where a woman I was seeing frequented. (she asked not me so maybe I would have had better luck). What Lex described above is not uncommon. It's always a good idea to communicate by email first since if you get permission, you can print it out and carry it with you. Not everyone is going to be on the same page obviously, so having something in writing will work much in your favor. If this is impossible, try to see if there is a website available. I went to the Museum of Contemporary Art this past weekend. When I visited their website to check and see if any changes were made to their parking or admission prices since I last visited, I noticed their photography policy was stated on the general info page. Likewise a "no photography permitted" statement was written in the concert program for a recent LA Philharmonic performance I went to. So all it takes a little legwork to get the info one needs preferably in writing.</p>

[jgalyon]

<p>Brad, Time and time again I've heard you state how that you and others "in many cities" have never had a "significant incident" of being harassed. First of all...I'm glad you've never had a bad encounter. Secondly, I don't buy into your claim that entire cities are devoid of such incidents. Obviously it isn't possible to talk to everyone in every city to ask if they're experienced some type of undeserved harassment...but if we could, I'd bet good money that you'd find that it happens <strong>everywhere</strong>. Just some places more than others. Just because one individual or anyone that individual knows of hasn't had the experience doesn't mean it hasn't happened. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p> It's not a matter of luck...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, actually...it often is. Call it luck...random occurence or whatever, but sometimes those who take every reasonable precaution to avoid such incidents find themselves right in the middle of one. </p>

 

[Brad_]

>>> Secondly, I don't buy into your claim that entire cities are devoid of such incidents.

 

I made no such claim. Why put words in my mouth?

 

It sounds like you have many of your own first-hand experiences in which you've encountered trouble?

[luis_g]

<p><strong>Lex typed "</strong>We're just a bunch of blind men around an elephant."</p>

<p>Except for people making generalized statements, I disagree. We are individuals with our own real personal experiences. There is no single elephant, but an inconsistent, scattered series of varying attitudes on the part of lawmakers and the individuals who enforce the law. So when our experience varies, it doesn't mean we're blind, but in fact accurately seeing what is there. Considering the amount of time I spend photographing, and my travels, it is amazing that I've only had a handful of problems. Photographers were having this type of problems long before 9/11, half a century ago. Robert Frank spent a night in jail under suspicion of being a "commie".</p>

<p> The day I heard on the radio (just after 9/11) that taking photographs of bridges was forbidden, I made it a point to photograph every bridge around the Loop in Chicago. Nothing happened. Not even the Chicago cops milling around gave me a second look. Later that afternoon on State St, at rush hr, I was making some street snaps of people on the sidewalk when a woman cop grabbed me by the collar, pushing me backwards against a wall, angrily and nervously demanded to know who I was and what I was doing. "I'm a TOURIST!" She stared into my face for a minute, apologized, and let me go with a smile. There was a lot of paranoia in the air at the time, and I understood her anxiety.</p>

<p> I think most of us, on all sides, are doing the best we can.</p>

[walter_strong5]

<p>John, what you did is commonly called "kowtowing to authority" and I, for one, don't think anybody should have to do that to exercise his/her constitutional rights. If you have a right to photograph a nuclear plant form public property then no prior notice is required and showing a security guard your ID is not either. If I wanted to walk along the sidewalk in front of the White House with a sign saying "BHO is a Commie S.O.B" I'd do so without asking the security service if it was OK. My constitutional right to free speech dictates that I can do that without getting anybody's permission. I'm always puzzled as to why people want to suck up to authority instead of just forging ahead and doing what they have a right to do. Our constitutional rights are not lost all at once. They are lost just a little bit at a time. It goes from thinking people have to ask permission to photograph that power plant to deciding just what hours of the day are permissable and it goes downhill from there. Attitude? My attitude is that my rights trump some government official's notion of what I can and cannot photograph from a public place. My attitude is that if the manager of that plant or one of his minions does not like me out there on the street photographing "their" plant then they can kiss mine and go to! I'm not a "subject", I'm a citizen.</p>

[jgalyon]

<p>No one's putting words in your mouth.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>... with no significant incidents in many cities and wide variety of circumstances - Brad</p>

<p>It sounds like you have many of your own first-hand experiences in which you've encountered trouble?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Don't know where you got that idea, Brad. The one incident in Charleston is the only such incident I've had.</p>

 

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

[Brad_]

John, where did I say "entire cities are devoid of such incidents?" I'm speaking from my own personal experiences as well

as those from my friends. I have no idea how you can equate that to what you claim I said.

 

>>> Don't know where you got that idea, Brad.

 

No, I was asking a question. From what you were saying, it sounded like you've had a lot of trouble. Glad you were just

generalizing.

[jgalyon]

<blockquote>

<p>"John, what you did is commonly called "kowtowing to authority..."<br>

"I'm always puzzled as to why people want to suck up to authority instead of just forging ahead and doing what they have a right to do".</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Walter, I would characterize what I did as 1. being smart enough to inquire about the legalities of the matter instead of assuming I knew, 2. preferring to avoid needless conflict when all it cost me was a pleasant thirty minute conversation, and 3. not feeling the need to be "in the face of the man"...in order to prove that I'm a man who can and will stand up for his rights as a citizen. </p>

<p>The federal guards that protect the plant and the community have a job to do...and I fully understand and appreciate that fact. Sure, I could have gone to the plant and taken the pictures and I would have been fully within my rights to do so. If I had been harassed by security and/or other law enforcement for doing so...I would have raised total hell, as I'm sure you would do in such a situation. But why put myself in that position when a phone call can prevent it? I don't feel that my rights have been infringed upon in the least by doing so, and I reject your notion that I'm "kowtowing". It's called common sense...otherwise know as "good judgement". Needless confrontation with authority is simply assinine. I have no desire to be a "concern" of those in charge of protecting a nuclear power plant that is soon to begin the production of tritium...a radioactive isotope used in the production of nuclear weapons. They have better things to do than question me...and I have better things to do than risk being on the receiving end of yet another "photographer harassed by authorities" story. </p>

<p>I mentioned an incident of my having been harassed by security guards at the Port of Charleston. The situation there was quite different. The port was formerly owned by a milling company and the brick facade of one of the buildings is still standing. Not a building mind you...just the facade of a building. I was attempting to shoot a picture of the facade when a guard told me it was against the law and that I could be prosecuted. Since he had a bad attitude and didn't seem eager to discuss the matter with any sense of respect, I decided to come back the next morning. At that time, I spoke with another guard who politely told me the other guard was wrong...and explained that photographing the port grounds was only illegal if the photographer had not first been granted permission by port authorities. He stated that as long as I shot from public property that there was no problem. I thanked him, and then stepped to the middle of the street to shoot...at which time the same guard began to yell at me that I had to go to the other side of the street and onto the sidewalk to shoot. I yelled back that the streets belong to the city of Charleston, and asked what the difference was in shooting from the street...or the sidewalk. He offered no reply, but insisted that if I didn't comply with his request that he'd have me arrested. I told him to do what he had to do...but that I would take my pictures...which I then took. I don't think that is "kowtowing" ...do you Walter? </p>

<p>I've never been on to plaster the bumper of my automobiles with stickers, but one that I've proudly displayed on my Pontiac for the past few years is a familiar quote attributed to one, Benjamin Franklin</p>

<p><strong>Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.</strong></p>

<p>You're barking up the wrong tree on this one, Walter.</p>

<p> </p>

[jgalyon]

<p>Brad, Thanks for clarifying things. I'm truly not tryin' to pick a fight with ya Brad. Perhaps I misunderstood what you were attempting to get across...but when you said the following...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>...with no significant incidents in many cities and wide variety of circumstances</p>

</blockquote>

<p>...it sounded as though you speaking as though it were documented fact that some cities have "no significant incidents", rather than that you were merely saying (as you explained) that you were speaking from the anecdotal experience of yourself and your friends. Now we understand each other.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>No, I was asking a question. From what you were saying, it sounded like you've had a lot of trouble. Glad you were just generalizing</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Again, thanks for the clarification. I'm actually quite like you in my thinking on the subject, as hopefully...my reply to Walter's comments will more fully show. I agree with everything you said in regard to how we conduct ourselves when out shooting. It's the most and the best that we can do to protect ourselves and our rights. Have a good day, Brad!</p>

[wpahnelas]

<p>i have yet to see any documentation of actual instances where photography was part of a terrorist plot or a precursor to same. this mythology seems to have begun with "suspicious" foreign-looking tourists photographing NYC landmarks shortly after the 911 debacle. since then it's assumed a life of its own, without any evidence that it's an actual phenomenon.</p>

[jgalyon]

<p>William, I'm not certain why there would be any concern over a photographer taking photos of (for instance) Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in light of the fact that you can go to Google Earth and peer directly down the center of the cooling towers...</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>Hey Brad! just stop by to say hello .. been a long time! ; )</p>

<p>Being 6"1' 295 pound with a huge japanese tatoo on my shoulder seem to keep trouble away from me..strange ; ) ?</p>

<p>I live in Montreal Canada, and i can say that i dont feel that i cant take picture of what i want, i do this with respect of other, dotn use those image for publicity, and people seem to be more tolerent here. I also travel a lot in Cuba, Mexico and other central american country where i take picture of everything again with respect and with a proper camera for my travel; a Canon G9 or a strip version of my Canon 5D (no extra strap, battery grip, flash, big zoom etc... so i look like a normal tourist taking personal picture, again i never felt i wastn at the right place or not in my *right* to take some souvenirs.</p>

<p>The only thing i avoid taking picture of is children in general (as a parent i dont feel comfortable when i see a stranger with a camera around a kid park .. so i apply the same rule to me) and im even more cautious in Mexico and other central american country where kid get abducted every 2min.. when you see a guy that look like a swat member with a M16 ready to shoot (the regular security guard across mexico store, kidgarden and some hot area in town) that help taking your distance ; )</p>

<p>But i feel that when i travel in the US, not everywhere of course, but more in the south, people seem to be more *agresive* if i can use this word (maybe a bit strong) or more defensive when they see a stranger that take picture of a old snackbar or a tower downtown ... i normally take my shot and have a little discusion with people that seem to be more curious than else about why do i take this or that... 9/11 certainly change how people feel about security, and i cant blame them.</p>

<p>I was in San Francisco last year with Brad, and i didtn feel any bad vibe... i will be in NY next month (2x 3 days in the same week..go figure!?), i hope to make good images of Coney Island, Brooklin and im taking a helicopter trip to see the big apple from above.. hope i wont get disturb when doing so ; )</p>

<p>not sure i add anything to this discussion, but it was a good way to start my day ; )</p><div></div>

[patricklavoie]

<p>did NY have a problem with tripod? not that i use it much, but i plan to do some long night exposure of time square and central park.. maybe a gorilla pod is the way to go?</p>

[jgalyon]

<p>Patrick, Good to have you comment. For some reason, copy and paste isn't working...but as to your remarks about the "South"...as a Southerner living right in the middle of the Bible--belt...a very conservative part of the country, you're absolutely correct. </p>

<p>As to photographing children in public areas...like you, I'm very careful not to cause undue alarm. On the occassion (rare occassion might be too strong) that I do take pictures of children it is usually at a park here in Chattanooga...Coolidge Park, which is located downtown and is the favorite gathering place in the city. There is a large fountain built for kids to play in and it makes for some great pictures. When shooting there I always hand out business cards and chat with the parents...and I quite often end up scheduling sessions for photographing the children and/or their families. Thus far I haven't had any complaints...and not even a single look that might signal disapproval, suspicion, or fear. If that were the case...I'd just quit shooting at the park because the last thing I want is for kids and their families to worry about the old guy with the camera. At present, people with cameras are probably very welcome...as we had an incident this past Saturday in which hundreds of teens gathered in the park and a drive-by shooting occurred in which 4 people were shot...fortunately no one killed. Two adults and one teen were arrested on attempted murder and other charges. We had a riot there two years back that involved hundreds of....you guessed it...out of control teenagers. There's substantial reason to think that these incidents are gang related, although our police department denies that link. But...this is the same police department that denied until only recently that gangs even existed in the city even though everyone knows they've been around for years. Now...we have a very serious gang problem with shootings and deaths becoming a daily occurence. During the last incident, police were talking to bystanders and asking for eye witness accounts and for any pictures they might have taken. So, at least for the time being...photographers are perhaps a bit more welcome. Seems there's "trouble in river city". </p>

[papasan]

<p>John</p>

<p>somehow your experience seems to reinforce the idea that there is a problem. Why would anyone have to go through such extreme as to contact the plant manager and discuss with him for 1/2 hour on the phone the idea of taking a couple of photos of his plant from a public location? Sorry but at this stage i'm thinking to myself, when did someone holding a camera become a suspected terrorist? The ridicule of this whole situation is that any "real terrorist" can just walk by the facilities with a cellphone and snap as many pictures as he wants without being noticed, or go to Google Earth and narrow down on the facility and get all the information that any terrorist would need to plan a terrorist act on such facilities... It seems to me that ordinary people with a camera and a passion for making images are being targeted/ harassed unnecessarily while the real danger is not even being affected by all the measures being taken. At this stage i'm thinking the terrorists are winning this war they have already turned the world upside down and imposed a state of paranoia in otherwise reasonable people. Just my two cents</p>

[jgalyon]

<p>Patrick, You'll probably get an answer to your question here...but if not, feel free to e-mail me and I'll give you a contact with a friend of mine who is a life-long resident of Queens...and a photographer who could advise you on the tripod issue. I'm thinking that using a tripod requires a city permit...but don't take that for gospel.</p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>Well done John. Hopefully others can learn from this on how to do it right when seeking access to a place etc. I ask access permission all the time from prisons, crime labs, etc and it's amazing how far a simple polite request can get a person.</p>

[jgalyon]

<p>Patrick, You'll probably get an answer to your question here...but if not, feel free to e-mail me and I'll give you a contact with a friend of mine who is a life-long resident of Queens...and a photographer who could advise you on the tripod issue. I'm thinking that using a tripod requires a city permit...but don't take that for gospel.</p>