I believe the police officer's comment referred not only to Mr. LeBlanc's "scruffiness" but also his lack of a "professional-looking" digital camera. Now, I don't know what kind of camera he uses, but I'll assume it is a simple point-and-shoot model which, of course, is a far-cry from the type of camera a professional photographer or photojournalist would use.

Oddly, I have been on the other end of the equation. Although I have never been present for or attempted to photograph a protest or demonstration, I have photographed public events. My camera, in particular the large, white, professional-model lens I use, creates the assumption that I am indeed a professional photographer/photojournalist. I have actually had crowds part or create openings to allow me to get "closer to the action" and I know that has occurred based on incorrect assumptions about my professional standing.

What we have, then, is nothing more than a reinforcement of stereotype based entirely on [prejudicial] assumptions. To see that type of profiling being used by the police is somewhat unnerving, to say the least.

Before we make an incorrect assumption about the police officer's thought processes, we must ask whether or not any professional journalists or photographers present for the demonstrations were also "harrassed." The answer seems to be "no," especially since a CBC film crew apparently filmed the event, including Mr. LeBlanc's arrest, without any hindrance or obstruction by the police (their film was used as evidence by the judge and strongly favoured Mr. LeBlanc's version of events).

So, we return to the question about who has the right to observe and record public events, especially protests and especially the manner in which the police handle or react to such events. If the answer is "accredited traditional media only," the issue, in my opinion, is not a question of mainstream vs. online or non-traditional media (read: bloggers). Instead, it is a question of the average citizen's right to be present at such events as observers and non-participants. It is also a question of the public's ability to act as a "conscience" where the actions of law-enforcement and other government officials are concerned. If the public does not have those rights than we must, to some degree, question our freedom and our level of democracy.