http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24344146-5001031,00.html
By Mark Morri
September 15, 2008 12:00am
IF the NSW police force spent as much time, energy and resources
controlling Sydney's streets as it does trying to control the media
this city would be a much safer place to live.
Over the past decade the police media unit has grown from a couple of
coppers who had a good phone manner when talking to journalists to a
full-blown multi-million dollar spin unit.
Its aim is simple: To control the information being given to the
public.
Now, the police have rolled out the ultimate weapon in secrecy under
the guise of "terror related security."
The encryption of police radio scanners, which for decades have been a
source of information to media outlets, effectively shuts the media
out of what is happening on the streets and - more importantly -
making sure they cannot get to a crime scene and report, photograph or
film it.
What's left in its place is nothing more than a police sanitised
version of events.
No one denies that police need a secure radio network to stop
criminals listening in on police operations.
No one denies that we should be vigilant against terrorists.
But not at the sake of the public's right to know. Not as an excuse to
impose censorship on the media.
The dramatic arrest of the man who went to Star City Casino with three
guns in May and allegedly shot his ex-girlfriend was only photographed
because news of the shooting came across ambulance radio, which is the
only source for finding out about violence or injury resulting from
crimes or accidents.
There is no reason why the media had to be locked out of the police
network which they have been allowed to access for decades.
It would have been a lot simpler - and cheaper - to give media outlets
encrypted radios, even charge them for it and make sure they followed
strict rules.
When Assistant Commissioner Bob Waites, who is in charge of
operational communications, was asked why this couldn't be done he had
no answer. He shrugged his shoulders and said sharing radio
information with the media was not an option as far as police were
concerned.
For 50 years media organisations have worked with police by monitoring
radio scanners. Many police forces in the US give local press outlets
encrypted radios. And as for having security benefits when it comes to
terrorism, New York City does not even have encrypted radios.
What has been served up as "access" by the police is a cleverly
designed information relay system called PEATS.
The media was told not to worry - we'd be kept in the loop.
But we were hoodwinked and out-smarted. The information being
delivered by this internet system of police call-outs is nothing short
of non-information.
The details it relays are distorted, disguised and delayed - if the
information is released at all.
According to PEATS we must have the best behaved city in the world. In
the past six months there has not been one shooting, stabbing, brawl
or armed hold up in Sydney.
You see, a shooting is not a shooting, it's a "concern for welfare".
A brawl is, "concern for welfare".
A stabbing is a, "concern for welfare".
Armed robbery are not armed, they are robberies. Violence is sanitised
from the record by the PEATS system.
But the biggest concern for welfare is public safety. Don't get me
wrong, the police media unit are proficient at pumping out press
releases informing of stabbing, shootings and the like when they feel
like it. However, it is normally in sanitised language and so long
after the event that there is little chance of the media interviewing
witnesses or victims.
Former police spoken to by The Daily Telegraph conceded that the
police hierarchy does not want the media knowing what was going on.
The latest move by police is even more sinister when taken in tandem
with the fact many police are too scared to talk to journalists
anymore. It is career stifling.
Rumours of phone taps persist and any request under freedom of
information to answer whether police have tapped journalists phones
are also denied.
The fact that phone conversations were taped between officer Adam
Purcell and journalists were publicly aired at a PIC hearing was taken
by police as a clear warning: Do not talk to journalists.
The solution is simple. Media outlets could be given encrypted radios
and a code of conduct set up to ensure that police concerns about
security are met.
This would solve what appears to be a growing trend by, not just
police, but government to control all aspects of information being
given to the public.
According to police spokesman Strath Gordon, senior police say they
would be happy to have the media at crime scenes.
But for this to happen police need to tell the media about the crimes
when they happen, not hours and hours after.