7 Comments

What happened to Arrington vs the NY Times? Editorial use against right of privacy in a public space...

Expand full comment

Interesting read. It's quite an odd contradiction yes: on one hand almost everyone now is a "photographer" (ah before I offend someone, "can take pictures" ;-) but on the other hand so many are against being photographed (in public).

Personally I don't really mind, but I do prefer to be 'part of the scene' rather than the main subject :-) If I happen to be in the frame, fine no worries. However, if a "Bruce Gilden" would show up like that in my face I would definitely not be amused. Just because you can doesn't mean you should ...

Expand full comment

I wonder how many of these folks complain about the growing gaggle of security cameras in public spaces. Or the AI software that analyzes what these devices capture? Orwell saw it coming.

Expand full comment

I do think that is going to exacerbate this. As we realize more how much we are always being watched from afar, we’re going to increasingly lash out at those who observe us close-up.

Expand full comment

Love the analysis, well done! Gotta FIGHT for YOUR RIGHT to PHOTOGRAPH anything you see in public!!!

Expand full comment

The number of seemingly intelligent people who don’t grasp that taking photographs in public is not and has never been a crime or unethical is appalling. Forty years ago people might inquire as to what you were shooting or comment on your equipment -“Wow nice camera.” Now they threaten you or threaten legal action!

Expand full comment

Appalling is a good word for it. Worrisome, too. I mean what I say about it being very problematic if this sentiment turns into actual commonly held belief.

Expand full comment