Covering the recent May Day protests against global capitalism in central London was trainee reporter Elizabeth Young's first major assignment for her college newspaper; she'd previously reported on local environment demonstrations but never a national event. As the day descended into violent clashes between protesters and police, she found herself caught up in fighting and claims she was deliberately attacked by riot officers while trying to film. "I had my [student press] I.D. around my neck and video camera clearly visible, yet they struck me straight on the side of the head," she says. "All the time they kept placing their shields in front of the lens so I couldn't record what they were doing to this guy who'd just been arrested."

Young was one of several journalists injured or harassed by police at the event. Others claim they were stopped, searched and refused access to the protest vicinity by officers who accused them of being sympathetic to the protest organizers. One photojournalist, London-based freelance r Darren White, says the police confiscated his camera tripod for fear of it being used as a club, saying if he wasn't working for an established newspaper then he shouldn't be there at the demonstration.

The incidents mirror the experience of London Daily Express journalist Danny Penman who was seriously injured by police while reporting on the "N30" anti-World Trade Organization rally at London's Euston Station last November. Just after 7 p.m., following a day of relative calm, police moved in to clear the station concourse, resulting in considerable disorder. Penman found himself herded into a nearby park where he claims he was viciously attacked by police in riot gear. "I suddenly found myself being repeatedly struck with batons," he says. "I made it clear [to police] that I was a journalist, and I couldn't believe it when they continued hitting out at me. I was only rescued after the BBC's Kate Adie intervened."

Penman suffered multiple cuts and bruises and a broken arm, the bone so severely shattered it required a steel plate and a dozen bolts to hold it together; doctors say he will require at least one more operation in order for the injury to heal properly.

Similarly, TV researcher Andrew Browning was attacked and intimidated by police while photographing last summer's J18 anti-capitalist riot for Squall magazine. "I'd shot half a film of the barrage of missiles coming from the protesters and of the retaliatory baton charges by police, when I saw two riot officers swing towards me. Ducking around a wheelie bin, they struck me with their batons across the shoulders and grabbed my camera. I shouted that I was a journalist and asked what on earth they were doing." Cut off from the main body of protesters and journalists behind police lines, Browning says the police demanded that he hand over all the film in his possession, threatening him with arrest for violent disorder if he didn't comply — "totally ridiculous, as I was simply taking pictures." He and others now have legal backing: In a landmark ruling, the British courts have decided the media do not have to hand over footage to the police.

On the same day, Nick Cobbing, a freelance photographer who has worked for the London Guardian and Germany's Stern magazine, says the police deliberately damaged his camera after seizing it during a baton charge. "I'd dropped it, but was told I'd have to make a statement to claim it back," he says. "When I did recover it, the damage was criminal — shutter punctured, the hood and filter missing — far more than would result from it simply dropping to the floor."

Penman is attempting to sue the Metropolitan Police for assault, with the backing of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ). Browning and Cobbing have lodged formal complaints with the Police Complaints Authority, seeking to recover the considerable costs of repairing and replacing equipment. Another journalist arrested at the N30 protest, Undercurrents News freelance photographer Charlotte Wilcox, is also considering legal action after being held overnight without charge and having her video camera and tapes seized.

All of these are among a number of journalists critical of the police's conduct at recent London demonstrations and of a growing list of reporters to fall foul of the law while covering protests and political dissent. Since 1993, almost two dozen U.K. journalists covering road protests, hunt sabotage and action against genetically modified crops have been assaulted, harassed or arrested by police. Some reporters estimate that the real figure could be much higher but say that many journalists have failed to report such incidents. All those questioned say their press credentials were ignored in spite of a police-operated PIN identification scheme designed to mark out bona-fide journalists. (In order to qualify for a press card, an individual must prove that he or she has had articles published and that at least 60 percent of earnings comes directly from journalism.)

Most of the journalists harassed or arrested while covering protests have never been charged. Nick Cobbing has the dubious honor of being one of only two reporters in the U.K. known to have been convicted of obstruction, after reporting at the 1997 Manchester Airport protest. The fact that most cases don't get this far has fueled speculation that the police's primary motive is not to criminalize journalists but to prevent compromising material from being broadcast or published.

One photojournalist, Roddy Mansfield, agrees with this view. He has been arrested by police on seven occasions while covering demonstrations for the Oxford-based Undercurrents News, and although never successfully prosecuted, says he has always been held long enough to ensure he misses his deadlines. (On every occasion, his footage, quite often exclusive, has failed to be broadcast because of this.) On one occasion in 1997, after being detained for fraud after forgetting his press card PIN, he says police deliberately wiped his videotapes in an attempt to remove any footage that could compromise their actions. What they hadn't reckoned on was that the sound would pick them up talking as they were doing so — "the first hard evidence that police were attempting to set the media agenda," he says.

Widely reported at the time, Mansfield's case encouraged Patricia McKenna, a U.K. member of the European Parliament to accuse the U.K. police of mistreating journalists covering environmental and social protests. McKenna's call at the parliament in Brussels for a formal investigation into the situation was later rejected by E.U. officials who argued that the number of journalists involved was so few it failed to warrant their time or resources.

The NUJ last year followed McKenna's example in outlining key incidents and calling for official policy on the subject from the British government. The organization also claims to have identified a police officer they say has been responsible for intimidating journalists at political demonstrations. The officer, Thames Valley PC 3513 (the force refuses to name him), has reportedly threatened journalists with arrest on numerous occasions and warned them to go home for their own good. London Sunday Observer photographer Andrew Testa recalls that he was stopped by the officer at two separate demonstrations, a Reclaim The Streets event in Birmingham and a vivisection protest in Oxfordshire. "On both occasions he said he had seen me at other political events, implying that this was somehow illegal," Testa says. "He also pointed me out to a police cameraman to ensure they got a decent shot."

The NUJ says it is aware of about a dozen incidents involving its members running into trouble with the police while covering demonstrations, but is cautious about supporting everyone claiming to be a journalist who has suffered harassment. "We will intervene where there is a clear case of a bona-fide reporter being prevented from carrying out their job," says spokesman Tim Gopsill. "But we can't — and do not attempt to — get involved every time someone with a video camera is arrested." "Bona-fide" reporters are characterized by the NUJ as being fully paid-up, press card-holding members; in order to qualify for legal and other backing, they must be actively undertaking some form of news gathering when arrested or harrassed. The organization has backed about half of the dozen cases that have come its way, mostly by providing legal aid to reporters suing the police; the remainder of cases were dropped by either police or journalist.

This cautious stance replicates the view of the Brussels-based International Federation of Journalists (IFJ). "Quite often we hear reports of campaigners being arrested for offenses, and just because they claim to have been filming, or because they write campaign literature, they presume that they are journalists and entitled to official help," says Cailine MacKenzie, IFJ human rights officer. "You have to draw the line between legitimate news gatherers and those interested in putting out favorable propaganda. If we acted every time an activist shouts 'press,' both our resources and credibility would be ruined."

According to the police, it is these very issues that sometimes lead to "journalists" being questioned or arrested. "Everyone who carries a video camera or uses the Internet calls themselves a reporter these days, so we advise our officers to use their judgment in establishing whether an individual is legitimate or not," says a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police. They add that officers decide primarily on whether an individual is carrying a legitimate press card, before taking into consideration other factors, such as who the individual is associating with and what equipment he or she is carrying. They also argue that a host of forged press cards are in circulation and that during the height of a demonstration it is not always practical to stop and verify whether a PIN identity is correct.

The NUJ acknowledges that the police's job is not helped by the fact that about 10 percent of British journalists belong to the UK's less well-known union, the British Association of Journalists, whose press card scheme is not always recognized by police. Some reporters are also choosing to belong to no union at all, in which case verifying the legitimacy of an individual on the spot is almost impossible.

While some journalists believe the meaning behind these incidents is police intention to manage the news (a claim categorically denied by London police), Paris-based media researcher Hugh Lawrence, who has been researching press freedom across Europe for a forthcoming book, is skeptical: "Although there has been an increase in the number of cases of harassment, I don't think it in any way amounts to an organized attempt to stifle reporting of the news," he says. While Lawrence notes that the number of reporters arrested while covering environmental issues in Europe increased from little more than half a dozen in 1991 to almost 40 in 1997 (explained, he says, simply by the explosion in direct action protest), he adds that many of those targeted place themselves in compromising positions by taking part in actions and producing articles that amount to little more than incitement to protest. "Most of those who've run into trouble with the law are young freelancers who are often sympathetic to the aims of the campaigners, not established journalists working for an established publication. The police perceive the two groups, perhaps rightly, as very different, and the [campaign-sympathetic] freelancers are an easy target."

AS THE MEDIA WATCH THE WORLD, WE WATCH THE MEDIA.

The Media Channel is a not-for-profit project of OneWorld Online and The Global Center, and is produced by Globalvision New Media.