San Francisco Media Access: Compromise or Half-Measure?
As police departments nationwide implement full encryption, San Francisco has taken a different approach: credentialed media access. But does giving journalists special access solve the problem—or does it create new ones?
The San Francisco Model
Unlike departments that have locked everyone out of police radio communications, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) implemented a media credentialing program that provides vetted journalists with encrypted receivers to monitor police radio traffic in real-time.
The program emerged as SFPD transitioned its radio infrastructure, recognizing that completely cutting off media access would harm both journalism and community relations. Rather than following the full-blackout approach of cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco created a middle path.
How the Program Works
- Credentialed access: Journalists from recognized news organizations can apply for media credentials
- Encrypted receivers: Approved journalists receive encrypted radio receivers that decode SFPD transmissions
- Real-time monitoring: Unlike delayed audio releases, credentialed media get live access
- Accountability preserved: Journalists can independently verify police activity and response times
- Breaking news coverage: Media can dispatch reporters based on scanner activity
Comparing Approaches
San Francisco's model sits between two extremes. Understanding where it falls helps evaluate whether it's an acceptable compromise.
Full Encryption
Los Angeles, Chicago, Denver
- No one outside department hears radio traffic
- Delayed releases (if any) are sanitized
- Zero independent monitoring
- Public safety info lost during emergencies
- No journalist access in real-time
Media Credentialing
San Francisco
- Credentialed journalists get live access
- Independent news monitoring preserved
- Some accountability maintained
- General public still excluded
- Department controls who qualifies
Open Access
Most small/mid-size cities
- Anyone can monitor with scanner
- Full public accountability
- Emergency info reaches everyone
- Community watchdogs enabled
- No gatekeeping of access
What San Francisco Gets Right
Compared to cities with full encryption, San Francisco's approach preserves several important functions:
- Journalistic oversight: News organizations can still monitor police activity independently
- Response time accountability: Media can verify actual police arrival vs. official claims
- Breaking news capacity: Journalists don't have to wait for press releases to cover incidents
- Fact-checking capability: Reporters can compare police statements to actual radio traffic
- Institutional memory: Long-term media monitoring identifies patterns and issues
These benefits mean San Francisco's model is demonstrably better than full encryption. Cities like Los Angeles and Chicago have none of these accountability mechanisms.
The Limitations
While better than full encryption, San Francisco's media-only approach still eliminates significant public benefits:
- No emergency access for public: During active shooter situations or disasters, ordinary citizens can't access real-time information
- Community watchdogs excluded: Copwatch, neighborhood safety monitors, and independent oversight groups can't listen
- Gatekeeping concerns: SFPD decides who qualifies as "media"—potentially excluding bloggers, independent journalists, or critical outlets
- No neighborhood monitoring: Residents can't track crime activity in their area in real-time
- Academic research limited: Researchers studying police activity can't access communications
The Gatekeeping Problem
One fundamental issue with media credentialing is that police departments control who gets access. This creates concerning dynamics:
Who Decides "Legitimate Media"?
When police determine who qualifies for radio access, they can potentially:
- Exclude independent journalists or bloggers critical of the department
- Favor outlets that provide friendly coverage
- Create bureaucratic hurdles that small newsrooms can't navigate
- Revoke credentials from journalists who report unflattering stories
Even if these powers aren't abused, the potential for abuse creates a chilling effect. Journalists may self-censor to protect their access.
Historical Context: The Bay Area's Scanner Tradition
San Francisco and the broader Bay Area have a rich history of scanner-based journalism and community monitoring. For decades, local news relied on open radio access to:
- Dispatch photographers to breaking news scenes
- Verify official accounts of police actions
- Track patterns in police activity across neighborhoods
- Alert communities to ongoing safety threats
The media credentialing program preserves some of this capacity for major news organizations, but the broader ecosystem of public monitoring that characterized the Bay Area for generations is gone.
Lessons for Other Cities
San Francisco's model offers lessons for cities considering encryption:
✓ If You Must Encrypt
Media credentialing is preferable to full blackout. At minimum, preserve journalist access to maintain some accountability.
✓ Be Transparent About Criteria
Publish clear, objective standards for who qualifies. Don't let credentialing become a tool for controlling press coverage.
✓ Include Independent Media
Don't limit access to major outlets. Bloggers, independent journalists, and alternative press should qualify.
✓ Consider Public Emergency Channels
Even with routine encryption, consider open channels for major emergency dispatch that affects public safety.
The Bottom Line
A step above the worst—but still a step back
San Francisco's media credentialing program is better than full encryption practiced in cities like Los Angeles and Chicago. Professional journalists retain the ability to monitor police activity, preserving core accountability functions.
However, it's not a true "compromise" that serves all the purposes open radio access historically provided. The public safety benefits of scanner access during emergencies, the community monitoring that enabled grassroots oversight, and the open accountability that came from anyone being able to verify police activity—these are lost even in San Francisco's model.
Cities should resist framing media credentialing as a complete solution. It's damage mitigation for when full transparency isn't achieved—not an acceptable end state for public access to police communications.
Alternatives to Consider
Before settling for media-only access, cities should consider these alternatives:
- Tactical-only encryption: Encrypt undercover and tactical channels while keeping routine dispatch open
- Brief delay models: 60-90 second delays for routine traffic (not 30-minute delays)
- Registered public access: Broader credentialing that includes any citizen who registers
- Live streaming with redaction: Real-time feeds with automatic redaction of sensitive information
- Emergency channel exceptions: Always-open channels for major incidents affecting public safety
Take Action for Transparency
Your voice matters. Here are concrete ways to advocate for open police communications in your community.
Contact Your Representatives
Use our templates to email your local officials about police radio encryption policies.
Get StartedRead Case Studies
See how encryption has affected real communities - from Highland Park to Chicago.
View CasesSpread Awareness
Share evidence about police radio encryption with your network and community.
Public Testimony
Learn how to speak effectively at city council and public safety meetings.
Prepare to SpeakRelated Resources
Sources & Further Reading
- SFPD Media Relations Office documentation
- California News Publishers Association encryption survey
- Society of Professional Journalists radio access reports
- Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA) analysis
- UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism police access research