| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
TSA ends journalist subpoenas over leaked memo
David G. McIntyre, Photographer
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 9:55 PM on 12.31.09 |
| ->> Happy New Year to Me :0) |
|
Ian L. Sitren, Photographer
 |
Palm Springs | CA | USA | Posted: 10:06 PM on 12.31.09 |
| ->> Tough spot Fish, sounds like it worked out. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 10:11 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Ian,
It worked out, however I dislike being tried-&-convicted by some people on here who did not, and do not, have all the information.
It is easy to play arm chair legal counsel in this situation. It is also easy to create black & white opinions when you don't have access to all the facts of what was occurring (including Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, who is quoted in the AP story)
I am just happy I won't have any black Chevy Impalas in my driveway again any time soon. |
|
Mike Brice, Photographer
|
Ogden | UT | USA | Posted: 10:22 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Fish,
I won't play arm chair quarterback, I'll just ask: Do you regret turning over your laptop?
Seems like Chris won't have to, and according to the AP story and Dalglish, the subpoenas that you two were served was a civil document and a court date would have be required to force you to turn over the laptop.
Interesting lesson here - two people served with subpoenas, two different lawyers, two different outcomes. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 10:30 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Mike,
No, because there was no info on my laptop, there was nothing they wanted on there. I did not and do not know who sent me the document. The shield law, if it existed, is moot since I was not protecting anyone.
Their tactics were very heavy handed but my laptop to me was like them saying "Give me the paper in your backpack" You answering "I have no paper in my backpack, I have nothing in my backpack" Do you go to court over not showing them your backpack is open?
The data they sought was not there nor was it in my possession. I could not readily access that data. I was being completely honest and truthful when I satisfied the investigators that I did not have the data nor could I access that data.
The difference between myself and Chris is significant. Chris knows who his source is. I do not know who my source is. I got multiple home visits, three in two days, to satisfy that I did not know, nor have the ability to recontact, the person who sent me the document. Right there, the difference is huge.
The subpoena, as you can read on Chris' site, states they want files/documents/etc in our possession. I had nothing in my possession. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 10:31 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Mike...
...you are free to speculate now...and actually I regret the TSA damaging my laptop. |
|
Nick Adams, Photographer
|
Houston | Tx | | Posted: 10:35 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Like it or not.
Many people disagree with how you handled the subpoena. Your blog is pubic and as much as you promote it, its seems like only a reasonable thing if you do something that is a hot button, such as give up a source. People will debate it in a public forum.
I guess now that everything is over, I guess now you can only whine that the feds messed up your macbook. |
|
Yamil Sued, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Peoria | AZ | USA | Posted: 10:43 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Fish!!
Glad you're out of the hot seat!!
You are my main source of Information when I travel.
Keep up the good work and have a wonderful new year and I look forward to reading your blog!!
Thanks!!
Y |
|
Kevin Johnston, Photographer
|
Oden | MI | USA | Posted: 10:53 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Steven,
Don't you think that going to these lengths to promote your blog is a little bit excessive?
Happy New Year to you anyway. Do a little happy dance around the living room and have an extra glass of cheer! |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 11:21 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Nick,
I did not give up a source. You should get your facts correct. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 11:22 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Kevin
...yea it was either a series of Google Ads of a Federal Subpoena. The Federal Subpoena was more cost effective. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 11:38 PM on 12.31.09 |
->> Nick,
Since you insist on being upset over an incorrect fact let me ask you this.
If you received a document from an anonymous source, what lengths would you go to in an effort to protect the fact that you legitimately do not know the source of your document? Would you battle it out to defend something that is not covered by any shield law?
To be covered by the shield law your source must ask for anonymity or 'deserve anonymity.' If you do not know your source and they have no asked for anonymity and you have no way of identifying your source or being in contact with your source...and due to their complete anonymity you simply can't reveal who they are...would you then argue that you aren't saying anything simply to dig your heels in?
If you had absolutely nothing to hide and could tell investigators there was absolutely nothing on your hard drive that could be of any assistance what lengths would you go to prove that you have nothing and could offer nothing?
At what length would you go to protect your right to protect something you don't have? Would you throw yourself in front of the bullet at the potential expense of your family to protect the open air behind you?
You would obviously be speaking in pure bravado of having the luxury of not dealing with being in this position...but please...let me know exactly how far you would go to protect no known source. |
|
Wes Hope, Photographer
|
Maryville | TN | USA | Posted: 12:21 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Nick wrote... "Your blog is pubic ..."
Come on Nick, name-calling is below the belt. |
|
David G. McIntyre, Photographer
|
Beijing | . | CHINA | Posted: 12:27 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Steven,
Should of asked them what they think of your blog, and give you an endorsement.
They must read it when you praise them too? |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 12:37 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> David,
It was noted by someone there that while the media has been all over the TSA needing a permanent Administrator this past week, I started writing about that in detail in April, openly praising their current Acting Administrator and noting that as an 'acting admin' her hands are tied.
I am not for or against the TSA. The TSA is what it is, they do good, I praise them. They do badly, it comes up also. I do hope they notice that.
This incident is not going to cause me to spew venom or change my opinions of the agency its self.
...and the endorsement is that I am one of the few non-Government sites/blogs on TSA's Blogroll and I have been for quite a while :0) |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 2:13 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Steven,
I am in no way passing judgment one way or the other on how you handled this. Scary stuff, nobody knows what they'd do in that situation. Nobody.
But I do take issue with your "I don't know" assertion. I am not questioning that you personally did not know the exact name/address/ssn of the person who sent you the document. I believe what you say. Even if someone told you a name, no one, really, knows with 100% certainty who anyone is online.
But other information in your possession could (and possibly did) provide a more than adequate trail to the person in question...or at least a next link in the chain. Just the email address is enough to provide another clue. Even if the email has been deleted, there are numerous recovery methods which can be used to extract this information from either your online account or your laptop. You know this, you've been doing this for a long time.
So when you say you gave them an "empty backpack", it's just not correct. You had a backpack, and you knew it contained a glass with fingerprints from the person involved. That would be a better analogy.
Again I'm not saying you did anything wrong here. No one knows how they'd react in such a situation and you're the one who hired a lawyer. But at least call it what it is and don't try to say there was nothing useful on your laptop. Even a footprint is useful to an investigator. |
|
Nick Adams, Photographer
|
Houston | Tx | | Posted: 2:41 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Steven.
I never once said my views on this issue nor am I upset with how you handled it.
From the wired.com story "The Gmail address consisted of the name “Mike,” followed by random numbers and letters." You also handed over your laptop for the TSA to browse over. I would view this as giving up a source.
To answer your question. As a journalist if subpoenaed I would go to jail before handing a laptop/hard-drive over "empty" or not. |
|
Thomas E. Witte, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Cincinnati | OH | USA | Posted: 6:43 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Nick- So, as an independent contractor - without the benefit of a corporate legal team - you'd put your family in financial jeopardy by sitting in jail while your mortgage, car payment(s), student loans, credit card bill(s) and utilities go unsatisfied because you aren't out there working.
To wit, you'll also be paying your own legal fees (as said independent contractor) which - last time I checked - ran between $300-$500 an hour on the moderate range. Sure you can go cheaper, but just like photographers, you get what you pay for when you go with low ballers.
Sure you could probably get some help from some sort of advocacy group with an axe to grind, but it's unlikely that NPPA would step up for a photographer that WROTE something on a blog (versus if they wrote an article to accompany a photo essay they put together) and likewise, a writers association probably wouldn't jump sides for a photographer (writing on a blog) either. But, stranger things have happened.
Point being, big words, but I call bullshit. If you're working for yourself, you have a multitude of interlacing variables to consider at all times.
I'm sure someone will counter with some bizarre scenario and ask/imply that I would turn over my hardware which is twisting my words. Each situation warrants a different reaction. Like Steven said, there was nothing to hide. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 7:02 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> David,
When I say I had an empty backpack, I chose both my words and analogy carefully. I had nothing, no trace, in my possession...including literally not knowing the complete email address.
I am not being coy, I am not being sly. For legal reasons, I am being quite literal.
-Fish |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 7:09 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> ...and some of you might want to reread the existing shield laws (there is no Federal law), the protected source needs to ask for anonimity or 'deserve anonimity'
No one asked me for anonimity, and since the source is unknown to me, it can't be easily established that the source of the document ( again, totally unknown to me) 'deserves anonimity'
Just keep that in mind should you end up in this position |
|
Nicholas Von Staden, Photographer
|
Pompano Beach | FL | USA | Posted: 10:35 AM on 01.01.10 |
| ->> I just watched a news banner(1/1//10 early) on TV that said: TSA say they released over 10,000 of the "classified document" to all over the world! |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 10:41 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Thomas,
Everything you say is absolutely true...all the numbers, the risks, everything. It has been this way for every journalist through history.
Principles are frequently not practical.
Practicality is not - and has never been - the issue when it comes to these types of conflicts. Most of the time in ANY Big Entity vs. Individual battle, the person taking the stand comes away battered, beat up, worse off in a practical sense than when they went in.
The question is - and always has been - what can you, as an individual, live with on the next day? Can you live with the idea of bankrupting your life/family/losing everything to take a stand? Can you live with the consequences of not taking a stand? Does it matter if you win or lose? Does your family support you in your efforts? Does it matter if they do?
These questions are not something to be argued in a public forum. It is an individual choice, and it stands alone, above judgment from another.
Neither you - or Nick - are right. And neither of you are wrong. Both of you are silly for arguing about it.
Steven made his choice. The other blogger made his. Respect both choices, because you can bet both were made with significant soul searching. |
|
Jeff Frings, Photographer
|
Milwaukee | WI | USA | Posted: 10:53 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Steven,
I'm glad this ordeal appears to be over for you. I'm just wondering if you're going to try to get the TSA to fix or replace the laptop they broke.
I know from experience that it's easy for people to second guess other people's actions when they do not know all the facts. I've had it happen to me on several occasions. Thanks for the work you do on the blog. I don't fly as much as many of your readers but it is very useful stuff for when I do fly.
Keep up the good work and keep us posted if anything else comes up about this issue, (if you can).
Jeff |
|
Tom Ewart, Photographer
|
Bentonville | AR | USA | Posted: 10:56 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Steven,
I am concerned that the TSA did damage to your laptop, It doesn't see fair that they took possession of it and damaged it and you are left to foot the bill for said repair. They should be held accountable for such damage of your personal property no matter what the circumstances were. If they don't you just been bullied by them and they are getting away with it. I know you are probably just relieved that the situation seems to have passed with out other things going down, but like you said you didn't have any information and didn't do anything wrong except report what was passed along to you.
It's like they have egg on their face and are going after the messenger instead of their own who leaked the document. I guess though they had to start somewhere. It looks like finding the e-mail attachment though Gmail would be simple thing for them to do now with the info that they have been given.
I think Obama owes you at least a beer summit or something for your trouble. But this has to to wonders to your standing as a great source for information about air travel, which all of us here at sportsshooter already knew.
In a few years I know I probably will not be flying commercial anymore, One they start strip searching everyone before they get on a plane and keeping passangers handcuffed to their seats during the flight. I'm still not happy about the airlines not serving free lunches on flights. The difference in feeling welcome and paying $412 vs paying $400 and then feeling nickled and dimed to death creates a lot of bad vibes in my book. I wouldn't put it past the airlines to put pay toilets on the planes next.
Thanks |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 11:00 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Nicholas
The global distribution of the security directive to persons outside of the TSA's control, in cities and countries high up DHS threat chart has been my argument all along. The document was sent to every and evey airport globally that has flights to the US.
The document was available to essentially all personnel that have customer contact |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 11:06 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Tom,
I recieved no attachment on my email. Many have assumed that. When I said this email had no footprint in my computer ... I meant there was no footprint.
Also the laptop issue is being handled by an attorney |
|
David Manning, Photographer
|
Athens | GA | | Posted: 11:11 AM on 01.01.10 |
| ->> Steve.... Dont ya think its time to kick back, relax and watch the Winter Classic now that its all over? |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 11:35 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> David,
I have 7 blog posts to write for a client in about 4 days; 2 to Che k and verify for my own site; an article to write for an airport's blog; research to do on the potential suitors for the TSA top admin job (which I have been writing about about since April; logistics to sort out for a 1 day, 8 city, 4 time zone, 7 flight, 4100 mile photo project...and some other work before I kick back and rest
Self employed with 3 kids... Sleep is for the weak :0) |
|
George Bridges, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 11:49 AM on 01.01.10 |
->> Fish,
I'm going to rent a black Chevy Impala and park it in your driveway. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 12:23 PM on 01.01.10 |
->> When my wife and I got back from Phoenix for the holidays last Sunday, we realized as we unpacked our bags her carryone diaper bag had two hand sanitizer bottles, a bag of powdered formula, and hair lotion that we forgot to put in checked luggage and never took out of the bag at inspection. It just went through the x-ray machine unquestioned. We were surprised.
Oh wait, someones knocking at the door... |
|
Dirk Dewachter, Photographer
 |
Playa Del Rey | CA | USA | Posted: 3:44 PM on 01.01.10 |
->> Steven,
I have been for quite some time been a fan of your photographic work as well as your writings. Unlike others on this forum, I am in agreement with you that only YOU can make the decisions that in the end affect you and your family. Having access to qualified legal advise is paramount but in the end they are your decisions and as usual there are a number of people like to speculate, are not in possession of all the facts and play the "what if" legal game without having any legal background. Sometimes, it just comes down to making an ethical, legally sound decision. From the bits and pieces I have read only you can be the judge whether or not it was the right decision for you and your career.
Looking forward to see more and read more from you. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 4:05 PM on 01.01.10 |
->> Geo,
I've already had the Impala... change it up a bit, park a Crown Vic out front. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 12:51 AM on 01.02.10 |
->> Fish,
How bout we get you a rug like the agent in the picture was wearing instead of the Crown Vic?
Michael |
|
Ronnie Montgomery, Photographer
|
Jon Wright, Photographer
|
Wayzata | MN | USA | Posted: 9:17 AM on 01.02.10 |
->> Fish, I hope the positive in all this will be that the publicity will drive traffic to your blog. All the best to you.
JW |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Delane B. Rouse, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | US | Posted: 3:34 PM on 01.02.10 |
->> The most interesting part in the story about is his attempt to get in contact with the source of the document where he tweets:
“To the gentleman who sent Flying With Fish the TSA Security Directive … Thank You! Can you drop me an email?I have a question. Thanks-Fish.” |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 4:08 PM on 01.02.10 |
->> "“To the gentleman who sent Flying With Fish the TSA Security Directive … Thank You! Can you drop me an email?I have a question. Thanks-Fish.”"
Before writing the post the TSA'er who wrote the post or "directed the composition" should have paid attention to Fish's tweet syntax/style and tried to emulate it better than this weak attempt. I could be wrong (a very small chance of it), but Big Flyer (we have Big Kahuna) didn't write the tweet highlighted in the article David posted. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 4:13 PM on 01.02.10 |
->> Delane,
You have an incredible knack for misrepresenting or leaving out details. |
|
Debra L Rothenberg, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 4:21 PM on 01.02.10 |
->> I missed part of this but am curious-how did you know that the email that was sent to you was something that was legitimate enough to post?
Boy, it sure sounds like it was a frightening evening for you. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
| | | Posted: 4:23 PM on 01.02.10 |
->> Debra,
I verified its validity... |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 4:36 PM on 01.02.10 |
| ->> If true, the idea that somehow a tweet was sent from Fish's blackberry in an effort to draw out the source - regardless of who did the typing - takes this to another level. |
|
Ed Wolfstein, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Burlington | VT | USA | Posted: 6:47 PM on 01.02.10 |
->> Frish:
I'm glad it's all working out with the dust beginning to settle. And intimidation issues aside, I think you've gained some great national notoriety about it all - publicity money couldn't buy!
Keep up the great work - I hope you'll gain more in the new year.
Cheers!
- Ed. |
|
Angus Mordant, Student/Intern
|
Sydney | NSW Australia | Australia | Posted: 6:14 AM on 01.03.10 |
->> --> To answer your question. As a journalist if subpoenaed I would go to jail before handing a laptop/hard-drive over "empty" or not.
Reminds me alot of the movie Nothing But The Truth, came out in 2008 and out on DVD on January 14th, interesting watch. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
| | | Posted: 7:38 AM on 01.03.10 |
->> Nick,
You wrote "To answer your question. As a journalist if subpoenaed I would go to jail before handing a laptop/hard-drive over "empty" or not."
So...if you have nothing to show, nothing to hide, no evidence what so ever...you'd go to jail & let your kids get taken away by social services because no one else was home, just so you could prove you had no possession of any evidence?
That is the threat I was facing. It was play ball or we sack your only current contract and take you with us for further questioning.
If I had a single piece of evidence in my possession, or in my laptop, which I did not (I use webmail for a reason, it keeps all my email off my computer, so I am never in possession of my email) I would have taken a vastly different stand.
But if you want to rack up legal bill and let your kids be taken away by social services, even for a brief period of time, so you can prove you were in possession of nothing then you have more balls than I.
Then in your eyes I am clearly a schmuck for making sure my kids didn't end up entering 'the system' for my principals of defending that I had absolutely nothing to protect.
Sure it would have made a great "hero" story and resulted it a fantastic law suit had I let them take me away in front of my kids and my kids then being processed into the system while I repeatedly told the Feds "I can't help you, I have nothing in my possession with any inkling of he persons ID" .... but I'd rather just be Dad to my kids, the guy who didn't get hauled off by Feds in front of them and let them get shuffled around like pawns, even if or a brief moment while I dug my heals in to protect nothing.
...and Nick, before you comment on the TNooz story, be sure to puff up a bit and tell me how you'd have dropped your tired and cranky almost-three year old from your arms to the ground, lunged across the front room and tackled the Special Agent in your house who was holding your Blackberry (which also contained not a single relevant piece of information the agents were looking for). |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 5:49 PM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> A lot of people think they would be Clint Eastwood in a tough spot. Then when it comes down to it they find out they are the writer peeing in his pants in Unforgiven. Nothing is more important then taking care of your family. |
|
Delane B. Rouse, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | US | Posted: 10:12 PM on 01.03.10 |
->> Here is the latest theory surrounding Frischling...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Lucky Strike says:
January 2, 2010 at 1:14 pm
I think everyone is overlooking the much more obvious reason behind all of this- Steven may never actually received the directive.
He possibly copied it directly from Elliott. His cryptic Twitter message, his buckling under the TSA pressure and his general attitude make it obvious that he was never a recipient of the message. He himself said he “received it, then checked to see whether Elliott received it, so he could verify its authenticity”.
Fact of the matter is, Fish has nowhere near the industry respect that Elliott has, so there is absolutely no way a TSA employee would pick Elliott (who writes for MSNBC, NatGeo and more), along with some self proclaimed industry strategy specialist with 1000 visitors a month.
Steven dug a very deep hole for himself here, and instead of coming clean, he dug deeper and deeper. He just got in too deep before he realized what he was doing, we’ll never know.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
(sorry...I can't link to the comment so I copied/pasted it here)
That theory has been out there since the moment this story broke, and certainly is plausible.
Delane |
|
Israel Shirk, Photographer, Assistant
|
Boise | ID | US | Posted: 10:26 PM on 01.03.10 |
->> "That theory has been out there since the moment this story broke, and certainly is plausible. "
Except for the part about how everything quoted on there is either totally inaccurate, or completely made up...
1000 visitors a month? How about this: Let's just start making up things. sportsshooter.com has 100 members. It's totally unqualified. But good for the argument you're trying to make.
The time delay between the two posts is on the order of minutes, not enough time to reasonably have this happen. He didn't have anything to hide from the TSA, so there was really no reason to hide anything. The TSA apparently knew who he was since they subpoena'd him rather than the actual copycat blogs.
"MSNBC, NatGeo and more" ... Maybe Steven's photo have gone in there? A consideration to make?
That and the fact that oh, I don't know... AIRLINES HIRE HIM TO RUN THEIR BLOGS... He's repeatedly worked for government agencies to photograph the security checkpoints themselves... Airlines have hired him repeatedly for his photography... He's around TSA people all the freakin' time and probably knows a lot of them by name at a lot of different airports and has plenty of contacts...
But ignore that. Let's just gossip and make anything up we want to. And call it fact. And pretend it's professional. |
|
Israel Shirk, Photographer, Assistant
|
Boise | ID | US | Posted: 10:26 PM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> 50? Here we come. |
|
This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|