The report states that there were over 25 instances in a two-month period in which journalists in the US were beaten and/or arrested while on the job, with charges such as "public nuisance." That seems pretty clear to me, and consistent with their reasoning for ranking other countries.
"How many were arrested versus beaten? And how long were the arrests?"
The answer to either of those would not change the importance of the figure.
Suppression of the press with police force is suppression of the press with police force; the only case in which individual details are relevant are in the lawsuits the reporters have hopefully filed.
Are you referring to bona-fide journalists, or the advocates with cameraphones?
I got stuck in the middle of our local occupy grop as they broke up and did a spontaneous march through rush hour traffic when I was walking to the bus. The newspaper and other reporters were clearly distinguishable from the mob, but there were plenty of wannabe "journalists" broadcasting from cameraphones. Those folks were more like PR flacks than journalists. I saw similar stuff in NYC as well.
I'm speaking from the perspective of my experience. If cops somewhere else are cracking the heads of reporters (vs. participants), I'm not aware of it.
I don't know who they were referring to in the report, although you could probably contact them to inquire about the specifics.
But just by quickly searching Google I found quite a few instances in which real reporters were harmed or arrested: A WNYW Fox photographer (Roy Isen) was maced/attacked with a baton, a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel photographer (Kristyna Wentz-Graff) was arrested despite her credentials hanging from her neck, an RT television reporter (Lucy Kafanov) was struck with a baton, a journalist in TN (Jonathan Meador) was arrested. John Farley (a reporter for WNET in NY) was arrested. That's just from 5 minutes of searching, so it wouldn't surprise me if the 25 figure only represented professionals.
Law enforcement in this country has become increasingly uncomfortable with the spread of information concerning it - whether that information is propagated by twitter, "bona-fide" journalists, or folks testing out their new camera[phone]. Every group of people has the right to do PR, without interference from the government - period. The gov't doesn't get to say "oh, but they were /really/ crazy". Don't care. They were within their rights, and you beat them.
Worse still, we have a promulgation of non-police "law enforcement" agencies acting more like a branch of the military operating within the borders as a national police force. I do not want to see the DHS's logo on a copyright take-down notice. I do not want the TSA searching people. The FBI is properly regulated - that's /why/ they're less efficient. It's not a flaw, it's by design. Creating the DHS and the TSA because the FBI has its hands tied by Congress was just despicable.
(My apologies if this is something of a rant - I'm getting frustrated with people piking at technicalities and ignoring the basic fact that civil liberties are being rapidly destroyed.)
Nope. I'm saying that when you become part of a mob, you aren't reporting a story -- you are part of it.
I got stuck in the middle of a performance of my local "occupy" movement's protest theater when walking home from work. The local police force in my city had orders to avoid provocation and violence with the protestors, and they followed those orders.
But the protestors with assistance with professional agitators from labor groups like the CWA weren't happy about that. They tried to pull a policeman off of his horse. They ran into the street during rush hour with tents. (i was nearly run down by a swerving bus.)
The first amendment doesn't give you the right to riot. It doesn't give you a right to seize public parks for your private use. Creating mayhem to attract TV cameras isn't free speech -- it's anarchy.
