newspaper report on open sky

[brey1234]

When state police chased and shot a man in Schuylkill County in May, they communicated as police always do: by radio. But the usual incidental audience for such events -- reporters and police-scanner buffs -- heard none of it.

That's because state police at Frackville have joined many of their counterparts across Pennsylvania in switching to OpenSky, a wireless communications system with encrypted digital transmissions that can't be picked up or decoded by scanners.

Police like the idea that their communications are shielded from the public. That's especially important in undercover work, when drug dealers or other targets might be tuned in. But the switch seems likely to hamper the media's ability to inform the public of major events, according to the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association.
http://www.mcall.com/topic/all-mc-allentown-radio.7295247jun06-st,0,5599481.story

 

[K4IHS]

Am I the only one thinking of the word Gestapo here? :-(

 

[brey1234]

government

As a journalist it bothers me to think that the government is going to "let me know" what "they" think is important!
http://www.wnep.com/about/station/newsteam/wnep-bobreynolds-624265,0,7981829.story

 

[Dorpmuller]

Am I the only one thinking of the word Gestapo here? :-(

Nope!

 

[K4IHS]

Now I'm thinking of 2 words... Trust Me. I just setup the scanners for our local CBS affiliate WINK TV here in Fort Myers, Florida. I still can't figure out how they listen to all those scanners at the same time?! Soon... only the guys that hide in bushes with a video camera will see and hear what happens. I wonder how long it will take before they are outlawed? :-(

 

[cifd64]

OK, so my question is wen did the media's needs begin to outweigh the safety of the troopers? You could have a camera man and reporter assigned to every first responder in the nation and they would still get it wrong. Last time i checked, i didnt purchase better radios to meet the needs of the media.

 

[NYCRADIO]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

It's simple you the media and everyone else has no rights to listen in on police traffic if the dept does not want access to it's radio traffic so be it you can only hope someone comes out with a scanner that can decode opensky and most likely will never happen

 

[K4IHS]

When? About the time a PD officer beats the crap out of somebody or pokes a stick up his behind for no reason... :-(

 

[rexgame]

But the usual incidental audience for such events -- reporters and police-scanner buffs

..and troopers whose shiny new radios weren't working right that day because I was talking on my push to talk cell phone at the same time...

 

[cifd64]

Im sorry, but there are better arguments than "The media should know everything". One thing to remember, the more info the media gets, the more they get to interpret. I have had the encryption argument here before. The fact of the matter is, any radio transmission is available to everyone. It is called FOIL.

 

[cifd64]

When? About the time a PD officer beats the crap out of somebody or pokes a stick up his behind for no reason... :-(

and yes, because those actions are spoken over the radio word for word as it is happening. (Sarcasm). Not to mention sensitive comms are being conducted over proprietary networks (such as Sprint two-way) or personal cell phones. so have fun listening in on that.

 

[rexgame]

Im sorry, but there are better arguments than "The media should know everything".

Not the media, the public. The media are simply the ones gathering the information.

 

[cifd64]

Wrong, Rex. The Media are INTERPRETING the data. The public only knows what the media tells them, and that is worse than state run media (not that its a good thing either). Media tells people what the money tells the media to tell. Its that simple.

 

[brey1234]

the truth

I believe that some traffic SHOULD be encrypted, such as drug stakeouts etc. But regular routine traffic should be open.
As a journalist we use scanners to get "tips" on stories. If it sounds important we go to the scene to find out what the FACTS are. Then we report. We NEVER use info on a scanner as the only source for a story.

 

[Citywide173]

Wrong, Rex. The Media are INTERPRETING the data. The public only knows what the media tells them, and that is worse than state run media (not that its a good thing either). Media tells people what the money tells the media to tell. Its that simple.

I'll agree with this to a point. The media spins it the way they want.....but with a department telling the media what they think the media needs to know, and using a proprietary radio system that the public can't monitor, it removes the "checks and balances" system that men far wiser than you or me felt was necessary to maintain a government of, by and for the people.

Yes, I do have a badge, I do deal in sensitive communication, and I do it in the clear. I also pay my dues weekly to a police union. The statement by people that you do not have a right to monitor a public safety communications system is flawed. You can get the tapes under FOIA (which is what I believe you were trying to reference above), and do whatever you want with them after you have gotten them. The "you don't have the right to listen" argument is only made by those that feel there is something to hide, and definitely goes against the spirit of our forefathers, even though they couldn't have ever imagined the technological advances the past 230+ years since they sat in a room in Philadelphia.

 

[rexgame]

Citywide173 <----

What he said. I get the need for certain sensitive communications to be obscured (heck, I had a hand receipt for 2 crazy 10's and a kick 13 and a KOI 18--I get COMSEC). For instance, I see no reason why a SWAT operation should occur in the clear. However, the day to day dispatch of a department has no logical reason for not being in the clear. In addition, There are several superior systems to PA's OpenSky. As I hinted at earlier, a system that is interfered with because of existing Nextel towers, and airport operations, just doesn't seem to be the way to go.

 

[Haole]

I'll agree with this to a point. The media spins it the way they want.....but with a department telling the media what they think the media needs to know, and using a proprietary radio system that the public can't monitor, it removes the "checks and balances" system that men far wiser than you or me felt was necessary to maintain a government of, by and for the people.

Yes, I do have a badge, I do deal in sensitive communication, and I do it in the clear. I also pay my dues weekly to a police union. The statement by people that you do not have a right to monitor a public safety communications system is flawed. You can get the tapes under FOIA (which is what I believe you were trying to reference above), and do whatever you want with them after you have gotten them. The "you don't have the right to listen" argument is only made by those that feel there is something to hide, and definitely goes against the spirit of our forefathers, even though they couldn't have ever imagined the technological advances the past 230+ years since they sat in a room in Philadelphia.

Excellent post Ed!!

 

[scannerboy02]

" Kisthardt said officials considered providing digital feeds to media outlets, but dismissed the idea as too costly. Another idea -- broadcasting over the Internet -- raised homeland security concerns. State police are first responders to incidents at nuclear power plants, and officials worried someone could phone in a threat to a plant and use the Internet to monitor response.

''We've looked into this a great deal,'' Kisthardt said. ''We're pleased with the security of the system from our perspective. Unfortunately, what's a benefit for our troopers is not necessarily good for the media.'' "


How about allowing the media to purchase OpenSky radios then have the state radio shop program the main channels into them so the media can still hear the routine traffic.

That's how they did it when my local county went to trunking back before we had trunked scanners and it worked great.

 

[cifd64]

The rights in our nation go only as far as not posing a clear and present danger. I dont think criminals or the public should know where a drug bust is about to happen or the location of federal agents tracking potential terrorists. Freedom of the press allows people to publish what they want in any form they want, it does not mean the press is allowed to do as they please and access sensitive information. I always said, the public pays for the nuclear missile codes, but we dont have access to them.

Again. it comes down to interpretation. IMHO, and i will catch static for this one, there should be an impartial committee to determine what gets encrypted and what does not. But if JQP feels that his rights are being ignored because the Feds are tracking someone on the other side of the country, but he cant listen in, I am not losing any sleep over it.

And sorry Citywide, I have always known it as FOIL (Freedom of Information Laws) on a local level.

 

[paramedszaf]

I am still suprised that the OpenSky system is still even an option in this state with all of its documented problems. Lancaster Co. (I believe) should have been the poster child for STAY AWAY FROM OPENSKY..

There are better systems out there, that I do agree with... Unfortunately the OpenSky sales team must have been better bull*hitters that day.

As for the not being able to listen, this will be a debate with vaild points on both sides of the argument. There isn't going to be an agreeable middle ground, ever...