A transit board member got angry and shocked with the San Francisco Bay Area officials’ decision to cut off cellphone service at some of its stations to thwart a planned protest, acting as “this type of censor.”
Officials of the Bay Area Rapid Transit said they shut down power to cellular towers Thursday evening for stations stretching from downtown to the airport in San Francisco after they learned the plan of the protesters to use mobile devices to coordinate their demonstration.
“I’m just shocked that they didn’t think about the implications of this. We really don’t have the right to be this type of censor,” said Lynette Sweet, who serves on BART board. “In my opinion, we’ve let the actions of a few people affect everybody. And that’s not fair.”
BART Deputy Police Chief Benson Fairow on Friday told KTVU-TV that the agency’s decision to turn off the underground cell service came after they received reports that a rowdy group which protested in July had similar plans.
“It all boils down to the safety of the public,” Fairow said. “It wasn’t a decision made lightly. This wasn’t about free speech. It was about safety.”
The tactic by BART was compared to the one used by the former Egyptian president to squelch protests that demanded his ouster from office.
“BART officials are showing themselves to be of a mind with the former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak,” the Electronic Frontier Foundation said on its website.
Michael Risher, the American Civil Liberty Union’s Northern California staff attorney wrote in blog: “The government shouldn’t be in the business of cutting off the free flow of information. Shutting down access to mobile phones is the wrong response to political protests, whether it’s halfway around the world or right here in San Francisco.”
Spokeswoman Rebecca Farmer said the incident last Thursday will be added to the agenda during a scheduled meeting between ACLU and BART Police Chief Kenton Rainey.
First Amendment Center executive director Gene Policinski however said the phone shutdown may not have impinged on the right to First Amendment since freedom of expression can be limited if there is an immediate threat to public safety.
“An agency like BART has to be held to a very high standard,” he said. “First of all, it has to be an immediate threat, not just the mere supposition that there might be one. And I think the response has to be what a court would consider reasonable, so it has to be the minimum amount of restraint on free expression.”
He said a court may look more favourably on BART’s actions if it is challenged if the freedom was limited narrowly for a specific area and time frame instead of “just indiscriminately closing down cell phone service throughout the system or for a broad area.” BART officials are however confident that their actions were legal.
“We had a commute that was safe and without disruption,” BART spokesman Jim Allison said Friday.
SF transit blocks cellphones to disrupt protest
A transit board member got angry and shocked with the San Francisco Bay Area officials’ decision to cut off cellphone service at some of its stations to thwart a planned protest, acting as “this type of censor.”
Officials of the Bay Area Rapid Transit said they shut down power to cellular towers Thursday evening for stations stretching from downtown to the airport in San Francisco after they learned the plan of the protesters to use mobile devices to coordinate their demonstration.
“I’m just shocked that they didn’t think about the implications of this. We really don’t have the right to be this type of censor,” said Lynette Sweet, who serves on BART board. “In my opinion, we’ve let the actions of a few people affect everybody. And that’s not fair.”
BART Deputy Police Chief Benson Fairow on Friday told KTVU-TV that the agency’s decision to turn off the underground cell service came after they received reports that a rowdy group which protested in July had similar plans.
“It all boils down to the safety of the public,” Fairow said. “It wasn’t a decision made lightly. This wasn’t about free speech. It was about safety.”
The tactic by BART was compared to the one used by the former Egyptian president to squelch protests that demanded his ouster from office.
“BART officials are showing themselves to be of a mind with the former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak,” the Electronic Frontier Foundation said on its website.
Michael Risher, the American Civil Liberty Union’s Northern California staff attorney wrote in blog: “The government shouldn’t be in the business of cutting off the free flow of information. Shutting down access to mobile phones is the wrong response to political protests, whether it’s halfway around the world or right here in San Francisco.”
Spokeswoman Rebecca Farmer said the incident last Thursday will be added to the agenda during a scheduled meeting between ACLU and BART Police Chief Kenton Rainey.
First Amendment Center executive director Gene Policinski however said the phone shutdown may not have impinged on the right to First Amendment since freedom of expression can be limited if there is an immediate threat to public safety.
“An agency like BART has to be held to a very high standard,” he said. “First of all, it has to be an immediate threat, not just the mere supposition that there might be one. And I think the response has to be what a court would consider reasonable, so it has to be the minimum amount of restraint on free expression.”
He said a court may look more favourably on BART’s actions if it is challenged if the freedom was limited narrowly for a specific area and time frame instead of “just indiscriminately closing down cell phone service throughout the system or for a broad area.” BART officials are however confident that their actions were legal.
“We had a commute that was safe and without disruption,” BART spokesman Jim Allison said Friday.
See Also: