Police improve social media skills, raising worries by traditional news media – ‘Agencies are eager to cut [out] the middleman and tell their own stories’

In this frame grab from a Monday, Jan. 8, 2018, video on the Twitter feed of the Douglas County, Colo., Sheriffs Department, Sheriff Tony Spurlock speaks to subscribers to explain the incident in which a deputy was gunned down responding to a call on Sunday, Dec. 31, 2017. The high-profile case illustrates how law enforcement agencies are increasingly lockstep in their approach to controlling the narrative after incidents. (Douglas County, Colo., Sheriffs via AP)

By KATHLEEN FOODY, Associated Press  DENVER (AP) 03/14 — It opens with a warning: This video contains footage from real police body cameras. Viewer discretion is advised.Then, an introduction: “I would like you to hear from me, what happened,” Douglas County Sheriff Tony Spurlock says, facing the camera.

The next eight minutes provide a carefully edited glimpse of the events that led to a 29-year-old deputy’s Dec. 31 death inside an apartment complex south of Denver.

The video posted Jan. 8 on the department’s social media accounts is punctuated by gunshots and shouts of panic and pain, and undoubtedly illustrates the danger Deputy Zack Parrish and other officers met during that call. Open government advocates also consider it a dramatic example of law enforcement agencies’ expanding efforts to release their own accounts of events to the public and media.

There’s nothing wrong with police communicating through social media, open government advocates said. But they worry it allows law enforcement to bypass questions from traditional media and warn that taking advantage of the tools requires agencies to be completely transparent, whatever the situation.

In Colorado, Parrish was among three deputies in three counties shot dead while on duty in barely more than a month. The calls that preceded the killings varied — a mentally ill veteran, a reported fight and a stolen car investigation. But the departments took similar approaches, relying on their social media accounts to release information and giving news outlets limited opportunity to ask questions about what happened.

Police have made use of social media for years, from viral videos of officers’ dance-offs with kids to the Boston Police Department’s extensive use of Twitter following the 2013 marathon bombing.

Agencies are eager to cut the middleman and tell their own stories, said Lauri Stevens, a former TV news reporter who founded an annual conference in 2010 that teaches departments about promoting themselves on social media.

“It’s not any less valid than any media, in this day and age,” she said.

Stevens said many agencies are getting better at connecting with residents on routine days, sharing updates and knocking down rumors during high-profile incidents.

Sgt. William Hutchison, Palm Springs police spokesman, presented at Stevens’ conference last year about his agency’s communications strategy after two officers were shot dead in 2016. Looking back, Hutchison said he would have posted even more information directly to Facebook and Twitter.

Hutchison said he doesn’t view social accounts as a way to avoid traditional media, and complimented local coverage of the officers’ killings.

“More people watch the news than the number of people who watch us, and you’ve got to maintain that relationship,” he said. “But law enforcement is becoming more skilled and has (our) own platform now that we didn’t have before.”

But that takes a staff capable of providing regular updates as they balance other responsibilities, a challenge for smaller departments on any day.

Sheriff Howard Sills leads rural Georgia’s Putnam County agency, which has no full-time communications staff. He became the primary spokesman during a June manhunt for two inmates accused of killing two prison guards on a transfer bus.

Sills provided no social media updates and instead held regular press conferences on the case. He continued taking reporters’ calls on his personal cellphone through the day the inmates were arrested.

Traditional media “get things right usually,” Sills said. “And if they don’t get things right, it’s usually our fault.”

In Douglas County, the department cited an ongoing investigation to deny media requests for body camera footage from the call that led to Parrish’s death. Days later, the agency posted its video to Facebook and Twitter , which includes some of the material denied to media.

The video omits the shooter’s face and voice. And it includes only audio of the moment Matthew Riehl fired through his bedroom door, fatally wounding Parrish and striking four other officers trying to take the shooter into custody on a mental health hold.

In an interview with The Associated Press nine days after the shooting, Douglas County’s sheriff defended releasing the edited video after the department denied journalists’ open-records requests for the complete footage.

“I knew that if I went to the press, radio and television, I’m going to get 60 seconds, and the rest was going to hit the editor’s floor,” Spurlock said. “I’m not going to be able to tell the story in such a fashion that I thought was appropriate for the dignity of Zack Parrish and the other four officers that were shot — and what I believe the citizens of Douglas County deserve.”

Spurlock’s office released roughly 50 hours of unedited body camera video the same day he spoke with the AP. It included Parrish’s shooting, the injured officers’ escape, and arriving officers taking cover as the shooter continued firing.

No portion of the unedited footage suggests the office’s video posted on social media inaccurately portrayed the shooting.

The files didn’t include Parrish’s body camera footage, and sheriff spokeswoman Lauren Lekander said it won’t be released “due to the sensitive nature of the material recorded on his camera.” Members of the SWAT unit that entered the shooter’s apartment and killed him don’t wear body cameras, she said.

Social media’s widespread use makes it a tempting resource for law enforcement, but police must use it responsibly, said David Alan Sklansky, a Stanford criminal law professor who has studied law enforcement use of technology.

“If a department wants its feed to be trusted, it needs to earn that trust partly by making sure it is candid and forthright in what is posted,” he said.

Failing to uphold that standard can prove damaging, as in San Antonio where the Express News found that a promotional police department video claiming to feature “real 911 calls ” actually included a fake call and two real calls with modified details. The newspaper uncovered the issue by requesting the original 911 recordings.

The agency admitted it was a mistake to include some of the calls but defended the video, which was intended to discourage the use of 911 except in emergencies.

“This was a hugely successful social media campaign that amassed 122,870 views on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube and even more through traditional media nationwide,” Jeff Coyle, director of government and public affairs, said in a statement provided to the newspaper.

Law enforcement in the other Colorado counties that lost officers this winter, Adams and El Paso , also depended largely on social media to share updates about the shootings, repeatedly directing reporters seeking more detail to those feeds. Meanwhile, press conferences held within hours of the officers’ deaths allowed for no media questions after officials read statements.

El Paso County Sheriff Bill Elder considers Twitter and Facebook his agency’s best tool to keep the community informed — and to simultaneously provide updates to traditional media. The department posted a stream of updates after Deputy Micah Flick’s February death during a stolen car investigation.

Residents inevitably take to social media when they see police swarming an area, and the department’s accounts should provide official updates before others weigh in, Elder said.

“We have to be proactive,” he said. “Otherwise we’re following the story; we’re letting somebody else write the narrative.”

https://www.apnews.com/d8a82706779042679fd9a521a77f8f70/Police-improve-social-media-skills,-raising-worries-by-media

Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Posted in: Community Relations, Media, Police, Policies & Practices, Public Safety, Social Media, Video

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

9 − two =

Terms of Use for Posting Comments

Terms of Use

This site (the “Site”) is operated and maintained by Law Enforcement Education Foundation, Corporation (“Company”). Throughout the Site, the terms “we”, “us” and “our” refer to Company.  The words “user,” “you” and “your” as used herein refer to you.

Please read these terms and conditions of use (“Terms of Use”) carefully before contributing content. If you do not agree to these Terms of Use, please do not contribute content. Your use of the Site is subject to the Terms and Conditions found here .

By contributing content to the Site, you represent and warrant that you are at least eighteen (18) years old and that you have read and understand these Terms of Use and any amendments thereto and agree to be bound by them. If you are not at least eighteen (18) years old or you do not agree and accept these Terms of Use, you are prohibited from contributing content.

From time to time, we may permit users to submit content to the Site.  You hereby acknowledge and agree that by submitting remarks, comments, suggestions, ideas, graphics, feedback, edits, concepts, comments, photographs, illustrations and other materials (other than personal information and/or registration information) through the Site (individually and collectively, “Submissions”), you (i) grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, transferable, irrevocable and fully sub-licensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, translate, distribute, publish, create derivative works from and publicly display and perform such Submissions throughout the world in any media, now known or hereafter created, without attribution to you; (ii) grant us the right to pursue at law any person or entity that violates your and/or our rights in your Submissions; and (iii) forever waive any and all of your rights, including but not limited to moral rights, if any, in and to your Submissions, including, without limitation, any all rights or requirements of attribution or identification of you as the author of the Submission or any derivative thereof.  We reserve the right to remove any of your Submissions from the Site, in whole or in part, without notice to you, for any reason or no reason.

Submissions are made voluntarily. Any submissions which include personally identifiable information are subject to our Privacy Policy found here .  You may not upload or otherwise publish content on the Site that (i) is confidential to you or any third party; (ii) is untrue, inaccurate, false or other than an original work of your authorship; (iii) that relates to or impersonates any other person; (iv) violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property rights of any person or entity; (v) contains any content, personally identifiable information or other information, or materials of any kind that relate or refer to any other person or entity other than the provider of the products, goods or services to which the Submission relates; or (vi) violates any law, or in any manner infringes or interferes with the rights of others, including but not limited to the use of names, information, or materials that (A) libel, defame, or invade the privacy of any third party, (B) are obscene or pornographic, (C) are harmful, threatening, offensive, abusive, harassing, vulgar, false or inaccurate, racially, sexually, ethnically or are otherwise objectionable or otherwise contrary to the laws of any place where such Submissions may be accessed; (D) constitute personal attacks on other individuals; (E) promote criminal, immoral or illegal activity; (F) promote or advertise any person, product or service or solicit funds; or (G) are deemed confidential by any contract or policy.

You are solely responsible for any Submissions you make and their accuracy. We take no responsibility and assume no liability for any Submissions posted by you or any third party.

Unless approved by us in writing in advance, you agree not to: (i) provide or create a link to the Site; or (ii) create any frames at any other sites pertaining to any of the content located on the Site.

We reserve the right, in our discretion, to update, change or replace any part of these Terms of Use for Posting Comments by posting updates and/or changes to our Site.  It is your responsibility to check this page periodically for changes.  Your continued use of, and/or access to the Site, following the posting of any changes to these Terms of Use for Posting Comments, constitutes your acceptance of those changes.