Los Angeles, CA—The
redundancy of reported drone news fables claiming privacy invasion and endangerment are
getting very tiresome. Okay, I agree
that these stories are still somewhat novel and interesting.
Claims that the little camera
drones are nearly colliding with conventional helicopter and other aircraft are nearly always patently bogus. Careful examination by a
journalist would expose the reality from fantasy.
Police and news helicopter
pilots see their career days being numbered by the threat of drones eliminating
their jobs. Helicopters cost $1,500 to
$2,500 per hour to keep in the air. The
drones cost nearly nothing!
Are the motives of helicopter
pilots really pure when they disparage, denounce or otherwise criticize camera drones and
their operators?
Can a little camera drone
bring down a helicopter or airplane? I
won’t say it’s impossible but it is incredibly unlikely. There are thousands of collisions between
large birds and planes every year.
Occasionally aircraft suffer minor damage but aircraft fatalities or
serious air accidents from birds are beyond rare.
The camera drones are zero
threat to helicopters. simply because the air movement or prop-wash cause by
the large blades would blow little drones far away.
I suppose a drone could be
sucked into a jet engine perhaps causing a failure of that engine but causing an
actual crash would be very unlikely.
No camera drone operator
wants to see his beloved and expensive little toy destroyed. The same goes for causing any kind of damage
or injury. Flying around conventional
aircraft is dangerous but, much more so to the camera drone more than anything.
The safety record of the new
camera drones is stellar and spotless. Zero
fatalities or serious injuries. The same
cannot be said about any conventional aircraft or large military drones.
The news media sends out
journalists with, for the most part zero experience with these things to cover
the “Chicken Little” stories of how bad things almost happened and sensationalism
and loathing nearly always sets in.
The same can be said about
stories of the little drones invading privacy even though they can’t see or
hear through walls or roofs.
The stories of some
journalists know no bounds when fictional sensationalism is better than the
truth.
There is yet to be one real
case of unlawful privacy invasion with a camera drone brought forward in any
court.
No industry needs camera
drones more than the news media. Recent
financially lean years have shut down newspapers and caused pink slips to rain
in nearly every newsroom.
The camera drones produce
clear, breathtaking still and video images needed for electronic
newsgathering. News organizations can
operate far better with a few camera drones out in the viewer or reader’s
neighborhoods than a single conventional helicopter.
Most of America is covered by
small or medium market news organizations that don’t now have nor can afford
helicopters. Drones are their obvious answer!
A conventional helicopter,
pilot and sometimes a photographer must be quickly scrambled to cover breaking
stories. Then they have to get to the
scene and that takes time too. A drone
can be deployed within a minute or three by an operator in the
neighborhood.
The media needs to position
itself at the very front of the fight with the FAA to use these in the course
of daily newsgathering.
There is a 1st
Amendment right that also needs to be protected. The camera drones are no different than any
other piece of news equipment such as a pencil, notepad or conventional camera.
The media has to begin
factually reporting drone stories taking out the fables and claims that the sky
is falling as a result of this exciting new technology.
It’s far easier to win this
fight now at the point of FAA regulation and legislation than years of
expensive court challenges.
Comments