KATV Stands Behind Its Use Of Drone Video

Despite the FAA’s regulations prohibiting the use of drones by news outlets, the Little Rock, Ark., ABC affiliate says it’s not breaking any rules because the station doesn’t own the drone that’s being used to take the video it’s aired. “This video is being used to advance the story and advance public information,” says News Director Nick Gentry.

A Little Rock, Ark., TV station is not backing off from airing footage shot from a drone, despite a warning from the Federal Aviation Administration that commercial drone photography is illegal.

“This video is being used to advance the story and advance public information,” says Nick Gentry, news director at Allbritton’s ABC affiliate KATV, who has included drone-shot footage in his tornado coverage. “We don’t use it because it’s cool.”

Drone footage shot by Brian EmfingerKATV’s broadcasting of drone footage, which it has done periodically for the last six months or so, came to the attention of the FAA last week after the station aired video showing the destruction caused by tornadoes on April 27.

Lynn Lunsford, the FAA public affairs manager who made the call, says he learned KATV aired the video from an Arkansas Democrat-Gazette newspaper reporter. Lunsford can’t elaborate on what transpired, saying only that he gave Gentry information on the agency’s regulations prohibiting the use of drones by news outlets.

“They wanted to inform me that they are aware of our drone and aware of our driving it, and in the FAA’s eyes that is a violation,” Gentry says.

Matt Waite, the University of Nebraska, Lincoln journalism professor who runs the school’s Drone Journalism Lab, says news outlets are flirting with trouble when they use drones before FAA safety regulations are in place.


“What we are witnessing is a car crash in slow motion,” he says. “Nothing good would come from just unfettered, unregulated, uncontrolled access to the skies. There needs to be some rules here.”

The FAA doesn’t regulate TV stations’ airing video taken by drones, but it currently prohibits news organizations — or any other business, for that matter — from using them for commercial purposes without special permission. The agency has been charged by Congress with coming up with rules for commercial use of the unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS, by September 2015.

Gentry says he doesn’t believe KATV is breaking any rules because the station doesn’t own the drone that’s being used to take the video. The UAS, a small contraption that’s just 18-inches or so wide, belongs to Brian Emfinger, a videographer who has worked at KATV for about six months and the only person who operates it, he says. Emfinger did not return calls for this story.

Gentry says Emfinger is fully in charge of when and how to use the drone, which he takes on shoots with the rest of his equipment, like station-owned cameras. Gentry says “we don’t ever ask Brian” to shoot images with the drone.

About “80% of the time” Emfinger uses the drone to capture images like “pretty weather shots,” Gentry says. “It is his drone to fly. It is not a requirement of the job by any means. It’s just a valuable tool that he supplies whenever he feels comfortable flying it. “

Gentry says he weighs the storytelling value, as well as legality, of video Emfinger shoots using the drone as he would any other footage shot by volunteer contributors. The day the tornado hit, drone owners called Gentry asking if he wanted to rent their UAS to take aerial shots of the devastation, he says.

Gentry says there is no question that Emfinger’s video showing the devastation caused by the deadly storms, among the first footage of the destruction aired, was important.

“When it first aired, I think it really grabbed everybody’s attention and showed that this is huge,” Gentry says. “His use of the drone and our airing it really got the message out of how devastating this tornado was. “

Subsequent videos shot from the drone have also played a role in furthering the story, he says. Last Thursday, for instance, KATV was able to detail the extent of storm damage by putting an image of a Google map of the area over Emfinger’s aerial video of the affected area.

The legality of drone photography is popping up in the news with increasing regularity.

Less than a month ago, an Ohio videographer was charged with a felony after refusing to ground his camera-toting drone. 

In February, a Hartford, Conn., photographer filed a lawsuit claiming police violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights when they demanded he stop flying his drone over a fatal car crash, capturing video. Although the photographer, Pedro Rivera, works for WFSB, Hartford’s CBS affiliate, he was not operating the drone on behalf of the station at the time.

In January, journalists’ Twittersphere lit up after the Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Wash. posted a video shot from a drone on its website.

Waite says journalists have a reason “to be itchy about this,” as drone video “has a very clear First Amendment purpose. It’s valuable to the public.”

But news outlets shouldn’t cynically use drone video from freelancers and citizen journalist and hope the “FAA turns a blind eye to it.”

“Without rules of the road, we’re putting ourselves at risk,” he says. “We on the ground need to be reasonably assured that we’re safe.”

Gentry says safety is Emfinger’s No. 1 priority when flying his drone. But he insists there is nothing illegal about using the video shot after Emfinger makes sure all’s clear.

“His video is not unlike other video that is submitted to us,” Gentry says. “We’ve had other people give us their video, and we’ve used that too.”

KATV, along with the other Allbritton stations, have been sold to the Sinclair Broadcast Group pending FCC approval.

Read other Air Check columns here. You can send suggestions for future Air Checks to Diana Marszalek at [email protected].

Comments (13)

Leave a Reply

Nate Mann says:

May 6, 2014 at 11:56 am

GO KATV! FAA is breaking the first amendment here. Fight this.

    Wagner Pereira says:

    May 6, 2014 at 5:44 pm

    Freedom of speech is not freedom of flight. There does need to be regulation, just as Broadcasters depend on the FCC to regulate spectrum space, the FAA has to regulate airspace.

    Scott Schirmer says:

    May 7, 2014 at 9:11 pm

    This is an obvious issue. You’re wrong insider.

    They can’t say Joe Blow hobbyist can take video, but. Jane Blow journalist cannot. That’s why it’s a slam dunk first amendment case. Period. The end. Read the amendment.

    Wagner Pereira says:

    May 8, 2014 at 2:45 am

    The FAA needs to regulate drones. Period. Unregulated is asking for a public disaster. That does not mean that Broadcasters should not be able to operate drones in the future – but means the FAA needs to get regulations in place. Many things were unregulated hobbys in the beginning, which became regulated because of Public Safety. The FAA controls flights of News Choppers and will keep them at certain distances, minimum heights and away from certain areas. Drones will be no different. Just imagine if a drone collided with a News or Medical Chopper at an accident scene, causing the Chopper to crash and kill people! How does the FAA give instructions to a drone about restrictions when there are no regulations for the operator to be in constant contact with the FAA? Again, Freedom of Speech does not mean freedom of flight! Broadcasters will be able to use drones sometime in the future – and no doubt they can lead to some great coverage, however, rules and regulation from the FAA need to be in place so this does not turn into the Wild West with disastrous consequences that would end up all News Coverage via drone being eliminated.

Mike Anderson says:

May 6, 2014 at 1:12 pm

so KATV is paying a 3rd party to break the law for their (KATV) benefit. So if I pay someone to kill someone else, i’m not in the wrong because I did not do it. A lawyers dream

    Janet Frankston Lorin says:

    May 6, 2014 at 1:47 pm

    Where did you read that KATV was paying someone to fly a drone?

    Wagner Pereira says:

    May 6, 2014 at 1:57 pm

    Actually a Prosecutor’s dream. A lawyer’s nightmare.

Katie Rosa says:

May 6, 2014 at 2:23 pm

So, KATV thought it was okay to use video from a drone owned by an employee and flown by its employee. Yeah, that should get them off hook.

Amneris Vargas says:

May 6, 2014 at 2:47 pm

License, don’t ban, drone pilots. In the wrong hands, drones are extremely dangerous (said my cat).

Lawrence Bernstein says:

May 6, 2014 at 6:41 pm

Leave it alone. It made for a great news story.

Eric Koepele says:

May 6, 2014 at 8:00 pm

We live and have been living for years in a hacker culture, spawned in large part by the freedom of the Internet. It seems only natural that videographers and/or citizen journalists would acquire drones, shoot video with them and make them available to media, which relies on freelancers and citizen journalists increasingly to capture and relay news. It seems to me that this growing trend ought to convince the FAA to get moving on its drone flight regulations.

Armstrong Williams says:

May 10, 2014 at 7:00 am

Privacy in this age is a fantasy.Everything can be accessed and so many ways are available online that thinking you are living your life without being exposed is a fool’s thought.We have no control over it.That said, it does show the effects of a storm and they can be drastic.Hurricanes and storms are natural disasters,another event we have no control over.In such times, it is better to opt for home improvement installations and impact windows.this ensures you are atleast safe from the storm.

Mark Brown says:

September 24, 2017 at 9:37 pm

Hi My name is johan santan,am from upper island cove , Canada.. I want to use this opportunity to thank God for using this Great prophet to solve my marriage problem. This Great Prophet of God brought my husband back to me. 3 years ago, i and my husband has been into one quarrel or the other until he finally left me for one lady. I felt my life was over and my kids thought they would never see their father again. I tried to be strong just for the kids but i could not control the pains that was tormenting my heart. My heart was filled with sorrows and pains, because i was really in love with my husband. Every day and night i think of him and always wish he would come back to me. Until one day i melt a good friend of mine that was once in my situation, but her problem was different a little bite, her ex-boyfriend who she had an unwanted pregnancy for refused to take responsibility and dumped her. She told me that mine issue was a minor case and that i shouldn’t worry about it at all.So, i asked her what was the solution to my problems and she gave me this Great Prophet of God phone number and his email address. I was doubting if this Great Prophet of God could actually solve my problem. So, I contacted this Great Prophet of God and he told me what to do and i did it. He told me to wait for just four days and that my husband will come crawling on his kneels just for forgiveness. So, I faithfully did what this Great Prophet of God asked me to do and for sure after four days i heard a knock on the door, in a great surprise i saw him on his kneels and i was speechless, when he saw me, all he did was crying and asking me for forgiveness,from that day, all the pains and sorrows in my heart flew away, since then i and my husband and our lovely kids are happy. That why i want to say .) ig thank you to God for using Prophet ikehedu .to solve my marriage problem. This Great Prophet of God made me to understand that theirs no problem on earth that does not have solution.So, if you are having same problem, any problem that is similar, i will advise you to a contact This Great Prophet of God straight at [email protected] And his facebook contact is this And his facebook contact is this (

More News