NOTE another thread on a similar subject got closed because it got silly and political. Lets not repeat that.
ALSO it is
civil unrest where there is still (in theory) some Rule of Law unlike a war zone where normal laws simply do not apply (and you are more than likly to end up dead).
I do photo/video journalism on the ground. I have covered civil unrest in various places. The problem is if you are looking at the camera viewfinder or the Drone control screen you are not looking at the situation rapidly developeing around you. So whilst a still photographer can get away with it because they are mostly don't have their eye glued to the viewfinder the videographers can't so easily as they are focused on the veiwfinder for longer periods and a drone flyer for longer still. This can be fatal. Video/Drone people need to work with a team. It can't be done solo at least not safely so DO NOT DO IT
The other problem is that any "side" in civil unrest will see a drone and assume it works for "the other side" .
Note there are always more than two sides.
For the Authorities there are the Police. However whilst in the UK that is The Police, in many other countries (Spain, Turkey, USA) there are multiple different Police forces who could be there. In many countries (though not the UK) there is the Military. Again they could come in multiple different flavors at the same protest/riot.
On the protesters side there are normally a large number of different groups usually with different objectives. and methods and even less coordination than the authorities. The chances are EVERYONE will be very suspicious of any drone they can see. NO ONE will be your friend other than the team with you. Your ground team is as much a target as the drone.
The big problem these days is everyone is internet and media savy. They want to get their story out
their way. So whilst wearing a helmet and body armour is a Good Idea (tm). Having PRESS written on them in large letters may make you more of a target. Indeed in recent years this has very much been the case in many conflicts. The incidence of war reporters being killed is rising at an alarming rate.
Also depending were you are: it is just as dangerous to your health to get "caught" by either side. Remember most participants will be running on high adrenaline and not always thinking clearly.
Many police forces can jam or get turned off mobile phones. They can probably also disrupt wifi etc. So one threat to using a drone is it might suddenly loose all signal and or drop out of the sky.
Depending where you are firearms might be prevalent. Police forces often use shotguns, even with non lethal ammo, they are idea for bringing down drones (whether shooting them is legally sanctioned or not) Protesters tend not to have long arms if they do LEAVE IMMEDIATELY. Pistols are not going to bring down a drone. However at the first sign of any gunfire from anyone you need to be in hard cover. Preferably somewhere else out of range unless you want to be a dead hero.
NOTE NEVER EVER carry any sort of weapon to a protest or rally. Reporters, even in armed conflicts, do NOT ever carry weapons.
As for controlling the drone. If tear gas is likely to be used you need decent
goggles and probably a respirator because you are going to have to spend some time getting the drone back down where you can retrieve it.
Are there likely to be Police helicopters? Normally these will want to work out side the range of any "ground fire" from the protesters. Normally stones some times sling shots and catapults. Not usually firearms. You will need to keep well out of their way as the downdraft will kill your drone (ie it is unlikely to recover retrievable flight before hitting something solid )
In some locations it depends if it is daylight or not. Also it depends if some quick thinking Police Officer has put a NFZ over the city. I am not sure how fast they can bit put into effect on on the DJI system. IT might work for planed marches/rally or for ongoing civil unrest but not things that just happen.
As a journalist you have a duty to report but not be illegal. Then you get in to the balances of right or wrong. That is a personal decision that will depend on the specific circumstances. In the UK there is a "Public Interest" clause where the greater good outweighs the some minor infractions..... Some times you get away with it other times you have to argue it in court.
So you finally get to the actual rules of flying over people, property and buildings. They seem a bit irrelevant at this point. However they still make a lot of sense pragmatically just as much as legally. You need to be well clear of angry people launching projectiles, wires on poles, buildings smoke and fires etc
You are better off taking a hand held camera up building and looking down. Which is why, so far, I have not seen any professional news crew using a sUAV for getting video of civil unrest.
Having been in a few riots over the years I can tell you: your best way of seeing them is
on the TV news from a sofa.
I have seen press photographers and video teams beaten up and their kit destroyed. This included experienced people who did nothing wrong and were were just unlucky. Some are even less lucky
2019 Violations of press freedom barometer | Reporters without borders As you will see citizen journalists get killed almost as much as the professional journalists.
