Agreed. Either the cameraman is a complete p***y, or their employer prevents them from defending themselves in any way.Good lord.... that idiot was so out of shape he could barely get up after falling on his ass (literally). I suspect he was very drunk, as well.
What's amazing to me is the passivity of those he attacked. Not one of them attempted to defend himself.
That's by choice. If I'm in a situation where I'm being attacked, I really don't care what my employer "allows." I'm going to defend myself and let the chips fall where they may (as it pertains to the job). I really don't get that mentality.their employer prevents them from defending themselves in any way.
Oh, yes... I know how expensive they are. But, I'm not going to guard a camera over my personal safety. That said, I'm quite certain I could have held onto the camera and planted my foot squarely on his chest, putting him on his ass.Some of those news cameras are extremely (as in, ridiculously) expensive - especially the live remote ones.
$70k is not unheard of.
I'd really like to see one of these anti-camera a-holes get sued to repair or replace one!!
I would even pay money to sit in the courtroom when the judge awards the damages.
Now THAT would be a priceless picture!
And with these expensive broadcast industry cameras, there's really no need to get in someone's face - generally speaking. (And I wish they wouldn't do it.)
They have excellent zoom lens and remote mic capabilities.