There is a tightrope that we sometimes walk in journalism.
How do you warn the public of a risk while not tipping off those who was exploit that risk?
How do you make people understand without making an instruction manual for the criminally inclined?
Such was the case with our recent investigation into the vulnerabilities of baby monitors.
Crib cams that send out an analog signal (the cheapest and most popular) can be easily intercepted. Most broadcast engineers know that. So does the Geek Squad. But a surprising number of parents that we talked to during our investigation were unaware.
So, the point of our story was this:
A)Crib cam signals go beyond the walls of your home (sometimes a block or more).
B)It doesn’t take sophisticated equipment to intercept those signals.
C)People using such cameras should be aware of A and B and take whatever steps they deem appropriate to protect their family from prying eyes and ears.
A part of the story includes a list of options on how C can be accomplished. For details,
click here.
We did show process. We didn’t go into details unnecessarily, but explained that we took a couple brands of baby monitors and drove the neighborhoods of Herriman.
Still, it’s not brain surgery. A video voyeur can figure it out even without a detailed explanation from us.
So why did I do it?
1) Because most parents I talked to had no idea. They needed to know.
2) There are so many homes with baby monitors. In one evening in Herriman, we picked up 15 separate signals. Mostly we saw empty cribs, but I was alarmed at how well the tiny microphones picked up conversations beyond the nursery.
It comes down to this: Is it more important to warn people or should we keep our mouths shut out of fear of giving some bad guy the “idea?”
I believe we walked the tightrope this time without falling off.
