AP Exclusive: Ferguson no-fly zone aimed at media-FAA Helped Police Prevent Media From Filming

[kpete]

AP Exclusive: Ferguson no-fly zone aimed at media
By JACK GILLUM and JOAN LOWY
Associated Press
Nov. 2, 2014 10:04 PM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. government agreed to a police request to restrict more than 37 square miles of airspace surrounding Ferguson, Missouri, for 12 days in August for safety, but audio recordings show that local authorities privately acknowledged the purpose was to keep away news helicopters during violent street protests.

On Aug. 12, the morning after the Federal Aviation Administration imposed the first flight restriction, FAA air traffic managers struggled to redefine the flight ban to let commercial flights operate at nearby Lambert-St. Louis International Airport and police helicopters fly through the area — but ban others.

"They finally admitted it really was to keep the media out," said one FAA manager about the St. Louis County Police in a series of recorded telephone conversations obtained by The Associated Press. "But they were a little concerned of, obviously, anything else that could be going on.

At another point, a manager at the FAA's Kansas City center said police "did not care if you ran commercial traffic through this TFR (temporary flight restriction) all day long. They didn't want media in there."…


http://bigstory.ap.org/article/674886091e344ffa95e92eb482e02be1/ap-exclusive-ferguson-no-fly-zone-aimed-media

FAA Officials Agreed to Help Police Prevent Media From Filming Ferguson Protests
Caroline Bankoff
New York Magazine
November 2, 2014 4:15PM

In the early days of this summer's protests over the death of Michael Brown, the Federal Aviation Administration agreed to enforce a 37-square-mile no-fly zone over Ferguson, Missouri. This was done at the request of the St. Louis Police Department, which claimed that shots had been fired at one of its helicopters. (That claim was never substantiated.) Of course, the supposed safety ban on flights in the area had the side effect of preventing news helicopters from filming the clashes between cops and demonstrators from above. Now, an Associated Press report seems to show that the no-fly zone's true purpose was to keep the press away, and local FAA officials knew it…
…

…The FAA enforced the no-fly zone until August 22. According to the AP, a St. Louis police captain tried to get it extended just before Brown's funeral and the day Darren Wilson was identified as the officer who shot the teenager because those events were expected to "bring out the emotions."

The AP's report on the no-fly zone is hardly the first time that the police have been accused of violating the First Amendment rights of reporters trying to cover the events in Ferguson, but the apparent participation of the federal officials at the FAA makes this one especially troubling.


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/11/report-ferguson-no-fly-zone-was-aimed-at-media.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/03/1341226/-AP-Exclusive-Ferguson-no-fly-zone-was-deliberate-FPD-effort-to-obstruct-media-coverage-of-protests

[morningfog]

1. An those of us who suggested that at the time were told its a CT.

Of course the people saying that are the usual authoritarian apologists.

[Orrex]

9. I'd like to see those accusations.

This abuse of a no-fly zone seems like a deliberate and unambiguous ploy to restrict media access. Who would suggest that it's a CT?

[joeglow3]

15. Please link. Some wait for evidence

We were the same ones who got blasted for not assuming a girl really got kicked out of KFC for medical scars (she wasn't) or that a black actress was stopped by police for having a white boyfriend (it was because she was fucking her boyfriend in public).

[daleanime]

2. K&R....

God forbid honest reporting.

[annabanana]

3. I KNEW that "no fly" decision stunk.

Glad to see the info come out. VERY sorry that our CorpoMedia© chose to go along.

[KingCharlemagne]

12. Well, the federal FAA acting at the behest of local police authorities issued the

no-fly order. As big a critic as I am of "our CorpoMedia," I think they had little choice but to go along with an order issued by the Feds. Had the media disobeyed that order -- and one can certainly argue that it should have -- I could see some aviation accidents maybe adding to the tragedies of Brown's execution and the violations of human rights by Ferguson and St. Louis County police.

I hope the media and the DoJ are preparing massive lawsuits and maybe even criminal trials against the relevant law enforcement agencies for RICO violations.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if we can't even trust the Feds (the FAA in this case), then this country is well and done down the crapper and we might as well start from scratch. I don't think I'm quite ready to go there just yet.

[WillyT]

4. K & R !!!

[Enthusiast]

5. This country is fucked up.

[HoosierCowboy]

6. How about

Drones?

[dembotoz]

7. yep we need drones

not with missiles but with cameras

[ebbie15644]

8. This is were a congressional hearing should be held!

[hootinholler]

10. To be fair to the FAA

I really don't want controllers to have to be in a position of second guessing law enforcement. When law enforcement requests a TFR, it should basically be granted. Likewise there should be heavy penalties for an organization that requests a TFR to suppress the press' right to report.

I suspect that if any press organization were to sue those requesting the TFR they would win handily.

Full disclosure: I work as a contractor on FAA IT projects.

[KingCharlemagne]

13. Bravo! Please see my supplemental thoughts in post #12. - nt

[randome]

14. Precisely.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[kath]

11. In the la-and of the free...

[jwirr]

16. Isn't this a violation of civil rights?

[jwirr]

17. Thanks to mainstreamers and news people like Chris Hayes it did not work.