Article for those Photographing Protests

[Saganich]

https://fair.org/home/photographers-grapple-with-informed-consent-in-uprising/

 

[Saganich]

related issue about using photographs with facial recognition
https://fair.org/audio/counterspin/CounterSpin200626Garvie.mp3

 

[Saganich]

I just find all this chilling. I can understand the public photography argument, but, these days with facial recognition and the idea that more than half the people in the US are in a facial recognition database, causes me to rethink publishing anyone's face.

 

[pentaxuser]

Interesting pic of the child on her father's shoulder. The gun appears to be pointing at his face and not at the child but the caption suggests otherwise and more importantly we have no idea of the immediate circumstances. Is he threatening the police and advancing on them or are they advancing on him and threatening him or are both parties stopped and holding a conversation and what is actually happening here in terms of that conversation should there be one?

The pic and caption is being used to lead us to one interpretation but there just isn't enough detail to know what is the actual situation.

pentaxuser

 

[Horatio]

Protesters are fair game, as are law enforcement, in my opinion. If they want anonymity they should wear bandanas.

 

[markjwyatt]

Protesters are fair game, as are law enforcement, in my opinion. If they want anonymity they should wear bandanas.

...or maybe... masks

 

[markjwyatt]

Here is a good one, "Hi, my name is [lens based worker], before you toss that Molotov cocktail, do you feel safe with me photographing you". If the Molotov cocktail does not get thrown at your feet, consider that a yes.

 

[logan2z]

related issue about using photographs with facial recognition
https://fair.org/audio/counterspin/CounterSpin200626Garvie.mp3

Interesting timing, I just attended a webinar last night about the dangers/misuse of facial recognition technology, and Clare Garvie was a featured speaker.

 

[John Koehrer]

Interesting pic of the child on her father's shoulder. The gun appears to be pointing at his face and not at the child but the caption suggests otherwise and more importantly we have no idea of the immediate circumstances. Is he threatening the police and advancing on them or are they advancing on him and threatening him or are both parties stopped and holding a conversation and what is actually happening here in terms of that conversation should there be one?

The pic and caption is being used to lead us to one interpretation but there just isn't enough detail to know what is the actual situation.

pentaxuser

What he said^^^^^^Captions could have been by an editor the was miles away from what was happening. When the BOR was mentioned
I had to reread the sentence that mentioned "photographer's". I believe that signing onto and abiding by this article just weakens protections
from the genuine article.

 

[StepheKoontz]

A local journalist friend of mine in Atlanta ended up in the hospital photographing a hostile protest with his cell phone. Be careful out there.

 

[reddesert]

Interesting pic of the child on her father's shoulder. The gun appears to be pointing at his face and not at the child but the caption suggests otherwise and more importantly we have no idea of the immediate circumstances. Is he threatening the police and advancing on them or are they advancing on him and threatening him or are both parties stopped and holding a conversation and what is actually happening here in terms of that conversation should there be one?

The pic and caption is being used to lead us to one interpretation but there just isn't enough detail to know what is the actual situation.

pentaxuser

You ask many questions, but here is another question: A man has a child on his shoulders and another man facing him has on full riot gear and is pointing a weapon. What interpretation is sensible to make about who is threatening whom?

While there is a conversation to be had about the role of photographers in the age of facial recognition, one also has to consider the importance of both citizen photographers and video-makers, as well as professional journalists, in letting us see what is happening.

 

[markjwyatt]

Photojournalists just need to get the shot and not consider social implications, etc. What occurs in front of your eyes is a factual occurrence. Interpretations can be questionable (by editors,the viewers, even the photographer himself), but if you do not capture the moment, it likely has gone uncaptured.

 

[Bill Burk]

It makes sense to me to have the language, the vocabulary to engage with a subject. There’s a before and after example. I often tell people I am shooting film so nobody will ever see it

 

[Saganich]

LOL, I say the same thing and add at least not for a week or two anyway, but attempt to get some info so I can send a screen shot.

 

[Auer]

Well since all protesters are Anarchists, Communists, Looters etc they should all be recorded for future re-education and labor camp round-ups.