Today's USCG/CNN Brouhaha Offers an Object Lesson for Radio Hobbyists

Earlier today CNN, followed by most other news outlets, aired a story regarding a USCG vessel intercept on the Potomac River near the Pentagon in Washington, DC. The intercept closely followed a speech that the President gave at the Pentagon in memory of 9/11. What was reported as a shots fired intercept based on radio communications monitored by CNN on a scanner turned out, in reality, to be a training exercise. This entire incident is the product of poor decision making by both the Coast Guard and CNN.

First, the Coast Guard chose the wrong time to conduct this type of training drill. Someone somewhere in the chain of command should have said "We can do this on the 10th, we can do this on the 12th, but the 11th is just not the right time for it." On such an emotional day, conducting that drill was just a bad decision. That drill was held on the wrong day in the wrong place at the wrong time. Even if it wasn't for CNN reporting what they heard on a scanner, it could just as easily have been reported by a motorist passing by on one of the bridges or a tourist on the shoreline that noticed Coast Guard boats chasing another boat.

Second, CNN was irresponsible in how they reported the incident. Based on what I have been able to ascertain, CNN monitored the "intercept" on Marine VHF Channel 81. Any experienced monitoring/scanning hobbyist would have immediately picked up that it was training drill because during a real intercept, the Coast Guard would have used Marine VHF Channel 16 to attempt communications with the boat they were confronting. CNN then failed to properly confirm what they hearing; they contacted the Coast Guard (at what level?) and were told that the Coast Guard knew nothing about it. At this point, they apparently decided to run with what they had rather than making further attempts to clarify things. The combination of what they thought they were hearing and an "I don't know what you're talking about" from the Coast Guard should have indicated that something wasn't right." More effort should have been made to clarify their information before they ran with the story but the competition of 24 Hours News Coverage took over and they ran with the story.

There is no doubt in my mind that this will be used to justify more communications encryption at all levels of government. Irresponsibility will lead to less sunshine on government activity by further encryption of government communications. We are losing one of our methods of oversight.

This serves as an object lesson to we radio hobbyists. We need to be responsible with what we hear and think closely about what we do with what we hear. I would hate to think it was one of us that provided this information to the media and triggered the confusion above. We must be responsible with what hear and think about the consequences of what we do with it then report or post accordingly. It is not my position to tell people what they should or should not do with they hear but I do filter what I post about on this blog and what I post on the scanning related email reflectors.

Personally, I think carefully about what I post here and by email on what I hear on my radios. It is my personal choice not to post movements of troops to combat areas such as Iraq and Afghanistan. I have chosen not to post movements of REACH flights because I don't know if they are en route to a combat area or not. I also do not report on CAPs, or Combat Air Patrols; if I do mention them it is AFTER the CAP is complete not while it is active. In the public safety area, I don't post or report on surveillance, undercover or tactical operations. When I post on a fire or similar incident, I don't post based on the initial dispatch; instead I post after units have arrived on scene and I've heard the size up. If I make a mistake in what I post, I take pains to 1) make a correction and 2) apologize for it.

Mac McCormick III
KF4LMT