The role and rights of the press involved in Occupy Wall Street coverage have once again become the cause of controversy. This time, it's not the nature of the coverage and whether it may or may not be biased for/against the Occupy movement, but rather, whether the press have the right to even cover the evictions from Zuccotti Park at all.

The New York Mayor's office attempted to justify keeping journalists away from the action in Zuccotti Park, a ban that came into place on November 15 on the basis that reporters needed to be kept away from ongoing arrests and evictions for their own protection.

This raises certain questions about where reporters can go and when. Usually journalists who have been issued a press pass by the NYPD can cross police lines in the event of a breaking news story.

However, as the director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, Norman Siegel, explained to The Observer, "There is a provision to deny press access, but the order must come from a supervising officer or DCPI, not just any officer on the street, he explained."

Even journalists working with major press associations have been arrested during the course of Occupy Wall Street protests, but obviously keeping them out of harm's way during the evictions prevented any detentions, but also stopped them reporting.

The Occupy movement owes much to citizen journalism, but in a situation like the evictions at Zuccotti park, amateurs who capture images on their iPhones are neither subject to the same limitations as traditional reporters, nor the same protection.

So, in light of this, it's worth contemplating a few important questions: how much power should the police wield over a reporter's right to roam? Is it too much to hold back traditional reporters when citizen journalists can report all they wish? Is it wrong to deny citizen journalists the protections offered to those who do it for a living? Where should the line be drawn?

Sources: The Observer, The Editors Weblog