[FedCom] White House criticizes news media for "reporting [that] was based on listening to a police scanner"

[ed]

An excellent article on the website of The Atlantic magazine reports that
someone monitored today's controversial USCG emergency exercise on 157.075 (VHF
Marine CH 81A.)  It even includes a transcript of the communications:

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/09/the_united_states_coast_guard.php


I looked on USCG's own website and it says CH 81A is for "U.S. Government only -
Environmental protection operations."  How was this security exercise related to
environmental protection operations?

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/vhf.htm


The Atlantic article also quotes a USCG spokesman today as saying, "Reports in
the media were based on overheard radio calls made over a training frequency."  

Is that a true statement, or is it a deliberately misleading USCG statement made
as an attempt at media damage-control?

We in the monitoring community are better equipped to get to the bottom of this
and help the mainstream media accurately report what really happened.  Someone
at USCG or CNN should be held accountable, and better policies should be put in
place and enforced to prevent more unnecessary public alarm.

-Ed



Quoting Ken <rfinder1 at verizon.net>:

> Well was anyone on this list or another list actually monitoring the 
> exercise and was the term used after transmission "this is an exercise" and 
> "simulated" (simulating)  gun fire etc????
> 
> As far as encryption goes, with the federal law enforcement agencies 
> including DHS units, you can expect to see (hear) that (encryption) pretty 
> consistently in the future -- this has little impact on the use & remember 
> if someone observes a lot of activity they might also call in a news tip 
> which would produce similiar media results.    I'm very surprised that the 
> USCG was using a VHF marine channel because they have plenty of their own 
> federal VHF frequencies assigned for their use.
> 
> Ken
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "ed" <bernies at netaxs.com>
> To: <phillyscanner at yahoogroups.com>
> Cc: <fedcom at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 3:05 PM
> Subject: [FedCom] White House criticizes news media for "reporting [that] 
> was based on listening to a police scanner"
> 
> 
> > When the White House criticizes the news media for "reporting [that] was 
> > based
> > on listening to a police scanner", it doesn't bode well for the future of
> > unencrypted public-safety radio communications.
> >
> > Doubtless this incident will be used by government radio encryption 
> > proponents
> > to push for more encryption of open, clear government radio 
> > communications.
> >
> > -bernieS
> >
> >
> >
>
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/11/AR2009091101740.html
> >
> > Radio Traffic Led to False Reports of Gunfire on Potomac
> >
> > Coast Guard Responds to 'Routine Exercise'
> >
> > CNN anchor Kyra Phillips said on-air that a CNN employee in Washington 
> > called
> > the Coast Guard about the scanner report, "and they said, 'We don't know 
> > what
> > you're talking about.' " So we went forward with what we learned." 
> > Phillips,
> > reporting in Atlanta, cited CNN employees in Washington for her 
> > information.
> >
> > In one transmission that CNN recorded and broadcast, a Coast Guard member 
> > can be
> > heard saying, "Vessel, if you don't slow down, stop your vessel in an R 
> > zone,
> > you will be fired upon." He was apparently referring to a restricted zone.
> >
> > Coast Guard Petty Officer Nick Cangemi said in an interview, "We use a 
> > frequency
> > reserved for the Coast Guard and reserved for training."
> >
> > Currier said it was possible that Coast Guard personnel had reported shots
> 
> > fired
> > on the radio as part of the exercise, but he stressed that protocol is to
> > preface any such transmissions by announcing that they are part of a 
> > drill.