Drone pilots Lisa, Heather and Daniel reveal how drone warfare, presented as efficacious and selective, is much more liable to error than US officials are ready to admit. The “safe distance” at which it is conducted has very real and damaging effects both for civilians and drone operators.

The primordial act of killing is dehumanized and sanitized, and leaves Heather with post traumatic stress disorders, Daniel with suicidal thoughts and a looming charge for espionage, and compels Lisa to travel to Kabul to seek pardon from the communities she contributed to grief.

As shown in the Ed Snowden case, the US government is quick to punish dissenters: a different war on terror is waged on whistleblowers breaching the secrecy of US military and speaking out against lies and abuses relating to the drone war.

In the discussion that followed, director Sonia Kennebeck highlighted how whistleblowing has become increasingly dangerous and all the more important to investigative journalism in today’s information society. She highlighted how the Intelligence Support Activity, a surveillance system classified as a weapon in itself, is able to watch everyone everywhere without us even knowing.

British barrister and former intelligence official Frank Ledwidge explains that humanitarian law is not fit deal with the relatively unrestricted warfare of drones, and the issue is likely to aggravate as more countries (Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and increasingly China) develop drone capabilities.

Findings by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism seem to corroborate the argument that drone warfare emboldens decision makers and hide the scale of harm away from public scrutiny: reporter Jack Serle logged US air strikes on Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and Afghanistan demonstrating much higher casualties compared to US official figures.

Drones have numerous civilian applications. One of them, filming, was skilfully used by Kenneback to demonstrate just how intrusive the National Bird’s “unblinking stare” is.

But like any new technology it demands open societal debate. The harmful consequences of secrecy and censorship are boldly portrayed by Kennebeck, whose documentary powerfully  advocates for more transparency both at home and abroad.

With the dangers of reporting and documenting conflict or uprisings claiming many lives every year, drones seem to be a practical and safe alternative to otherwise dangerous missions. On Wednesday 20 November, the Frontline Club hosted a panel discussion chaired by Richard Sambrook, professor of journalism  at Cardiff University and a former BBC Global News director. The five-person panel debated the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in the field, touching on ethics, law and the safety, as well as the advantages, it brings to journalism.

L-R: Tom Hannen, Professor Robert Picard, David Goldberg, Gerry Corbett and Richard Sambrook. Photo: Greta Hoffman

The evening started with a demonstration by Tom Hannen, a senior innovations producer at the BBC’s Global Video Unit, who brought along an actual drone and showed the audience how to fly it. He explained:

“We are starting small and simple with this at the BBC, so we’ve been looking at wide open spaces, agricultural stories, all these wide open spaces in a controlled environment. We’re primarily using them for filming features rather than on the ground news gathering. . . . The last thing you want to be doing in a place where people are already shooting is putting a beacon up above you saying ‘We’re just here’.”

The BBC, however, is only one of a number media agencies and private companies investigating the use of drones. This means that there might be a need for new legal guidelines to regulate their use. David Goldberg, a legal and regulatory specialist for Unmanned Experts, addressed this issue:

“What we are actually looking at here is the general right to photograph . . . this is a general right that does not require permission. There was a statement made by Lord Bassam in 2008 . . . saying that the taking of photographs in a public place is not subject to any rules or statute. There is no legal presumption of privacy for someone in a public place.”

Even though the use of drones seems to be legal, Professor Robert Picard, director of research at the Reuters Institute in Oxford and a world-leading specialist on media economics and government media policies, said that there were many ethical issues to be considered:

“We are increasingly offered images from third parties and this is going to create a lot of ethical issues, because we need to think about the conditions under which those visual images were obtained. Were they obtained by violating laws? Were they obtained by breaking expectations of privacy?”

One member of the audience asked what would happen if in the future journalists stepped back from control and the drones would fly autonomously. Robert Picard said:

“They do have that now, primarily in military operations. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don’t. It was one of the great problems the US military had when invading Iraq.”

Gerry Corbett, who works for the Civil Aviation Authority Safety and Airspace Regulation Group, added:

“A general requirement at the moment is that all aircraft have to have a person in charge to control them. . . . The trouble that comes with autonomous unmanned aircrafts is who is responsible for the aircraft at the point when it crashes? The programmer?”

https://soundcloud.com/frontlineclub/drone-journalism-the-future-of

They offer the opportunity to document scenes that cannot be captured on the ground and to be used in circumstances when it would be too dangerous to send in a journalist. But what might this mean for privacy, ethics and safety in our skies?

With these opportunities come many questions and challenges. We will be bringing together a panel of experts to explore the potential for the use of drones in journalism and to discuss the challenges this new technology presents.

Chaired by Richard Sambrook, professor of journalism and director at the Centre for Journalism, Cardiff University. He is a former director of Global News at the BBC where he worked as a journalist for 30 years as a producer, editor and manager.

The panel:

David Goldberg is legal and regulatory specialist for Unmanned Experts and is co-author of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems & Journalists published by the Reuters Institute, Oxford University. He directs deeJgee Research/Consultancy and is a senior visiting fellow at the Institute of Computer and Communications Law in the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, University of London.

Professor Robert Picard is the director of research at Reuters Institute, University of Oxford. He is a world-leading specialist on media economics and government media policies. He was formerly based in the Media Management and Transformation Centre at Jönköping International Business School in Sweden where he was director and Hamrin Professor of Media Economics.

Tom Hannen is a Senior Innovations Producer in the BBC’s Global Video Unit. Working with a small team, he is currently learning how to build, fly and film with small unmanned multi-rotor helicopters.

Gerry Corbett joined the Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) Safety and Airspace Regulation Group in June 2012, his focus is all matters associated with the operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems in UK airspace. He is also the sponsor for Civil Aviation Publication 722, the primary guidance document for Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in UK Airspace.