On April 23rd, 2015, Connecticut news source WTNH released an article entitled ‘Police welcome being videotaped if rules are followed' (http://wtnh.com/2015/04/23/police-welcome-being-videotaped-if-rules-are-followed/). I couldn’t help but draw an obvious link to both our class discussion about police and cameras, and a couple of the surveillance and photography articles on HuskyCT.
I felt that the 2011 Huffington Post article by Will Guzzardi was the most directly related to the WTNH article. Guzzardi wrote about Chicago-based artist and activist Chris Drew, who was charged with a felony for recording his own arrest. His alleged crime was that he violated Illinois Eavesdropping Act. “The state is one of twelve that has so-called "two-party consent" eavesdropping laws. This means that audio recording any conversation is illegal unless all parties to the conversation consent,” wrote Guzzardi.
After watching a video attached to the WTNH article, I felt like I had a much better understanding of the perspective of law enforcement regarding camera use. “We are out there in the public eye. Everything we do is public, essentially, [Deputy Chief Brian Foley] said. “So videotape us, just respect our distance and do it in a safe manner without being irresponsible and inciting a riot.” Deputy Chief Foley said that there are many reasons why videotaping could be an issue, including the potential for the recording of police discussion about private medical, victim, or suspect information that would be a breach of privacy. This reminded me of the Illinois Eavesdropping Act, and helped me see some reasoning for why some of those laws may be in place.
I also thought about what we said in class about us being used to having camera phones around, and about us sometimes not even realizing that a photo or video is being taken. The Chicago article was written about four years ago, while the Hartford article was released yesterday. That four year span leaves a lot of time for the culture surrounding videotaping to evolve, and its possible that police are trying to find ways to embrace the technology as it gets even more advanced and more easily distributed through traditional and social media. The video in the WTNH article shows a cell phone video of a police officer being held in a chokehold while people stand around and cheer on the situation. Not only do I think that it was extremely stupid on behalf of the woman recording the video to have taken and shared it in the first place, but I think that it’s a great example of a reason that police would be more welcoming of the camera.
In my opinion, we are all people and should have equal access to the potential that video has to clear up a situation in question. I also feel that footage taken out of context could be equally detrimental to a case, and that people just need to be careful and thorough if they’re going to take or use footage in this capacity.
1 comment:
I really like that you were able to bring to light something that happened so recently in relationship to the course and the reading.
I tend to agree that in an age of modernity and technology that we should not be penalized for engaging in everyday activities, like snapping selfies or just pressing record on our cell phones. I do not think that police should be above cultural norms (or the constitution for that matter) because there's a chance that they will look bad -- I think it is a useful and important tool to keep the power of law enforcement in check. However, I agree with the police officer in the article that people should maintain respect and safety in regard to recording video or snapping photographs.
Good find!!
Post a Comment