Well, this is incredibly ironic you could post this question about encrypted frequencies today because it popped up today in my area. Read this story. Link <http://www.kolotv.com/content/news/Storey-County-chase-ends-in-Carson-City-speeds-reach-120-mph-476459903.html> The guy who was being chased knew about the first set of spike strips set for him, so they had the Nevada Highway Patrol discuss the second spike strip set up off the air. Las Vegas police just went to encrypted frequencies. This was planned before the October mass shooting. Part of the problem with going to encrypted frequencies is that other emergency providers can't monitor the frequency, or can't do it without the expense and hassle and getting encrypted radios. Firefighters and ambulances monitor police frequencies, for instance. Many frequencies are public. You can check it out at https://www.broadcastify.com and listen in on some frequencies. There are stringers in just about every market, but I'm not sure how many have full-blown companies. Later on in "Shot in the Dark" they go to the funeral of a stringer in Santa Barbara, which is a tiny market. Just a stringer, not a full blown company. Thank you for agreeing with me about the ending.
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 3:51 PM, Kevin M. <drunkbastar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 2:41 PM Adam Bowie <a...@adambowie.co.uk> wrote: > >> I've finally caught a few episodes of this and I have some thoughts - >> sometimes quite conflicting. >> >> First off is that I'm not altogether happy that the company run by the >> three British guys, RMG News, is also the main producer of the series. To >> me, that's a conflict of interest if we're supposed to be getting a truly >> impartial view of the business. The fact that two other companies are part >> of the production also suggests that while I don't doubt that there *is* >> competition >> between them all, it's not quite as it's always portrayed. Obviously this >> is based on any number of Discovery-style constructed reality shows. >> >> To me this is high-end constructed reality. The production values are >> high, although I would suggest that much of the passing shots and >> establishing footage were shot at a completely different time to the >> action. But I'd love to get a clear indication of the timelines of when >> these events all occurred. It's purposefully not always entirely clear if >> events took place on the same night as other events. >> >> By the way, I do understand where that Guardian reviewer was coming from. >> If you watched this series, then it would seem that local news is solely >> made up of car accidents and fires. Yes - they're spectacular - flames, and >> lots of lights from first responders' vehicles, but it's not really clear >> to me how much is truly news. I also understand it because in the UK you >> never get anything like this - even with the fact that everyone has mobile >> phones to capture incidents that take place near them. Yes - there are car >> accidents, but rarely would you get footage unless there was a serious >> number of vehicles or casualties. >> >> I'm curious about a couple of things though. Beyond LA, do many of these >> stringer companies exist? As far as I'm aware, it's unheard of in the UK >> but there's a reason for that I'll come to. >> > > > >> Second, besides Santa Monica, why don't any of the emergency services >> encrypt their communications? It's just not possible to listen in to UK >> emergency service calls. I don't think it has been since the 80s. It's not >> a question of having scanners with the right frequencies, but it's no more >> possible than it is to listen to cellular communications. If those radio >> frequencies were encrypted then these guys would really struggle. But I >> assume that villains listen in to police radio traffic for their own >> nefarious purposes too. So it really makes no sense operating in the clear. >> > > I encountered a discussion about this elsewhere on this big series of > tubes. In some states there are laws against encrypting first responder > frequencies. In California there doesn’t seem to be a law against it, so > some LEOs do, but there also don’t seem to be any laws against making or > selling scanners that decrypt it. Mind you, this was a part of one thread > unrelated to the topic I was reading about, so take everything I just wrote > with a granule of sodium. For a while I followed a Facebook page that > posted/tracked police activity where I lived, and they used a decrypting > scanner, which the local fuzz was not happy about. I eventually unfollowed > it, because it REALLY ticked off the cops and I’m just paranoid enough to > not want to draw the ire of grumpy armed cops. > > > >> Finally, it's unclear to me how some of these guys aren't getting done >> for speeding or running red lights! Also, apparently none of them can start >> a car without screeching wheel spin. But then I think the soundtrack has >> been "juiced" a little to sound more exciting. >> >> That all said, the end of that first episode was remarkable. >> >> >> >> Adam >> >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 5:54 AM, Steve Timko <steveti...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> So I know my review was so gripping that everyone went out and streamed >>> the first episode as I suggested. But in case anyone is interested, >>> Loudlabs and On Scene TV have video going out to the networks and to be >>> shared to local markets of the catastrophic Los Angeles-area fires. So it's >>> not all shootings and car crashes. >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steve Timko <steveti...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I have mixed feelings about the new Netflix “Shot in the Dark” series >>>> about television stringers in the Los Angeles market. It’s slickly produced >>>> and expertly shot (for the most part) but it also seems a tad manufactured >>>> at times. Like maybe the subjects are in bed with the show’s producers to >>>> heighten drama. >>>> >>>> The best way to explain it is that it is a reality TV example of the >>>> “Nightcrawler” movie starring Jake Gyllenhaal. Basically the three camps >>>> are three competing television freelance operations. One is RMG News run by >>>> British-born twin brothers. Another is Loudlabs run by Scott Lane. He is >>>> the most paparazzi of the trio. They capture him passing traffic on the >>>> right trying to get to a story quicker. Another time he runs a red light. >>>> When one of his employees commits a journalistic felony and gets called out >>>> on the news, Lane laughs it off. If he had been my employee and done that I >>>> would have bitch slapped him to Barstow. The last is OnScene TV, the >>>> largest, run by Zak Holman. Lane hates Holman, in part because Holman calls >>>> him out on his recklessness. But Lane criticizes Holman as someone who is a >>>> journalist because he’s a failed first responder and that criticism is a >>>> direct hit. Holman has flashing lights in his car that he uses one time as >>>> a civilian to slow down Los Angeles freeway traffic because one of his >>>> drivers is photographing an incident on the road. And he’s currying favor >>>> with cops and firefighters. >>>> >>>> They use all kinds of tricks to get great shots of the photographers. >>>> They have some talented photographers getting some compelling video, often >>>> expertly framing the freelancers. They also have cameras mounted on the >>>> cars the freelancers drive. They use either drones or helicopters to get >>>> video from above. And for me the coolest thing they do graphically is a map >>>> that shows the locations of the freelancers and their destination so you >>>> can see their routes. It’s clear it’s a race to get there first. >>>> >>>> I don’t want to give away too much, but definitely watch at least the >>>> first episode for the world class, epic cliffhanger. Maybe one of the best >>>> ever in episodic reality TV. Part of the reason the show resonates with me >>>> is because it reflects my personal life. I’ve been a journalist for more >>>> than 30 years and I’ve spent the last 18 months as an assignment editor at >>>> a smaller market television station. One problem we’ve always faced in >>>> journalism, and especially at the TV station, is picking which breaking >>>> news things to cover. Scanner traffic is often wrong and major stories go >>>> silent when the police go to tactical channels. Guessing which thing to >>>> cover and getting there quickly is a constant theme in “Shot in the Dark.” >>>> >>>> This is a Guardian review of the show. >>>> >>>> https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/nov/30/shot- >>>> in-the-dark-review-pure-undiluted-rubbernecking-feeding-on-human-misery >>>> >>>> This reviewer calls it voyeurism. I don’t feel like it’s voyeurism at >>>> all. It feels like a job. I get no emotional satisfaction or pleasurable >>>> reaction from watching the pain people suffer. The one time that felt most >>>> voyeuristic was in 1990. I accompanied police on a prostitution sting. They >>>> had a female police officer wearing a radio wire. I sat with two officers >>>> about 200 feet away in an unmarked car and listened to men solicit her. I >>>> felt so embarrassed for the men I let out involuntary groans and gasps. I >>>> could not keep myself quiet. >>>> >>>> “Shot in the Dark” also has an energetic soundtrack to keep the >>>> showing. But the soundtrack and quick cuts of cars zooming into the night >>>> started to wear on me by about episode four. It became more of a gimmick >>>> and a liability. I give the series a thumbs up because the story line picks >>>> up by the last couple of episodes. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > Kevin M. (RPCV) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
