Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I do not know about Illinois. You probably could not do this in Wisconsin: (3) Public place of accommodation or amusement. (a) No person may do any of the following: 1. Deny to another or charge another a higher price than the regular rate for the full and equal enjoyment of any public place of accommodation or amusement because of sex, race, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. 1m. Deny to an adult or charge an adult a higher price than the regular rate for the full and equal enjoyment of a lodging establishment because of age, subject to s. 125.07. 2. Give preferential treatment to some classes of persons in providing services or facilities in any public place of accommodation or amusement because of sex, race, color, creed, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Ridings" <daniel.ridings@muspro.uio.no> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 10:59 AM Subject: RE: [Leica] Inspired but arrested > So ... access to the news is governed by access to money (private > property). So I could open a mall in a suburb to Chicago, bar all > non-white ethnic groups, and if I had enough sympathetic white customers > (who would not let themselves be interviewed outside the mall) then this > would be totally legal? > > Hmmm ... South Africa tried this for quite a while, but it didn't work in > the long run. > > I still say wierd, and wierder for every minute. > > Daniel > > > On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, B. D. Colen wrote: > > > Yes, a journalist WOULD have to get permission to interview people in > > the mall IF the journalist was challenged by mall employees. Freedom of > > the press does not give one the right to break laws; it gives one the > > right to publish information one gathers. While police departments, > > other local governmental authorities, and Congress, may chose to give > > journalists certain privileges or rights, I'm unaware of any immunity > > from trespassing laws. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Keith R. > > Wessel > > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 10:08 AM > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Inspired but arrested > > > > > > > Let's say the mall in in a posh outer suburb but that there are > > > communication lines with the inner-city scum so that they turn up at > > > the mall and bother these beautiful people out in the burbs. So the > > > owners of the private property start barring certain elements from > > > their malls. They hurt the neighborhood, so to say. > > > > > > Now this would be news. Would the journalist have to go to the PR > > > people of the mall and ask their permission to do an article on racial > > > > > discrimination at the mall? > > > > Excellent point. It begs the question as to whether we as a society > > seek to exclude the undesirables. I think that has been done with some > > success in India. We once had a "Great Society" movement in this > > country to provide opportunity for the less privileged. > > > > I am somewhat troubled by the distinction between journalist and > > documentarian. Do the wonderful photographs posted today by John > > Beeching not provide an historical slice of life which deserves respect > > equal to that of the breaking news journalist? > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html