House of Lords awakes from slumber

Peter Black · Jul 19, 2008

This is the upper house of the British Parliament and is populated by retired/defeated politicians and those who have hereditary titles, so the average age tends to be quite high. This week, however, they woke up long enough to discuss street photography in Britain and the level of harassment handed out to everyday snappers. The debate starts about halfway down the page at the link below, and if you've got the time I'd say it was worth a few minutes to see the views expressed.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldhansrd/text/80716-0001.htm

Larry Bullis · Jul 19, 2008

My Lords, this reference, so kindly provided us by our noble friend, is highly recommended for your reading.

Dave Miller · Jul 19, 2008

Thanks for posting the link Peter, it makes interesting reading.

Larry Bullis · Jul 19, 2008

I guess I should say that I did mean to be a bit flip, but I was impressed that they discussed the issue and with a good deal of sensitivity at that. Thanks for the link. Maybe there is hope.

L.

David A. Goldfarb · Jul 20, 2008

The Countess of Mar said:
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware of a report in the press today about a father who was prevented from photographing his children in a fairground by a crazy woman who thought that her child was also being photographed and that the photograph might be put on the internet? All of us who have children or grandchildren like to photograph them. Is it not time that the hysteria that has built up was quelled?

Yes, quite a good discussion.

Trevor Crone · Jul 20, 2008

Many thanks for the link Peter, a very interesting piece of information.

Lets see, in the fullness of time, if it makes any real difference and that over enthusiastic security personnel will stop harassing us in public places.

ooze · Jul 21, 2008

Thanks for the link. But I'm rather disappointed that the discussion ends so abruptly. Are there any conclusions? Any action items? Will there be a follow up?

Several years ago I was harassed by a warden on Trafalgar square. I wrote a letter to the mayor at that time (Ken) and complained, and received the expected "there are no restrictions etc." answer. I'm still angry

Aurum · Jul 21, 2008

Its good to see that the Lords are taking an interest in this, however the message does not seem to be getting down to the grunts on the shop floor so to speak.

This from the Daily (Hate) Mail Today

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1036728/Photographing-thugs-assault-police-tell-householder-snapping-proof-anti-social-behaviour.html

petercook80 · Jul 23, 2008

how (quickly) times have changed

The section relating to photographing children brought back a memory that shows how quickly times change.
Back around 1996 I brought a new Nikon F50 to get back into photography. To try it out I went to a Steam Fair that happend to be in the area, it was a Sunday afternoon and it was really a family day. Now I was on my own and snapped away at all the kids on the rides and got some really great shots, it could not have been further from my mind the thought of getting accused of some nasty crime, nobody once said anything and I was pretty much ignored. Now I would fear for my safety if I did the same again.

RobC · Jul 23, 2008

That's what happens when you have a media(filth) which is not answerable to anyone for its actions. Its not elected and yet its more powerful than government in influencing thinking and setting public agenda.

petercook80 · Jul 23, 2008

Sad Rob but very true. If the results were harmless they (media) could be ignored but there not, which makes it all the more scary!

pentaxuser · Jul 24, 2008

rob champagne said:
That's what happens when you have a media(filth) which is not answerable to anyone for its actions. Its not elected and yet its more powerful than government in influencing thinking and setting public agenda.

So true but there are occasional setbacks for them such as the " Aguidos" in the Madeleine McCann case and today Mr Mosley who may now have grounds for libel. Just a pity that "wins" such as these are at best neutral for innocent photographers and at worst, have a detrimental spin-off.

When a certain PM, now ex PM, consulted Mr Murdoch, you realise the power of the press. Puts "Citizen Kane" into perspective.

pentaxuser

Sparky · Jul 24, 2008

rob champagne said:
That's what happens when you have a media(filth) which is not answerable to anyone for its actions. Its not elected and yet its more powerful than government in influencing thinking and setting public agenda.

I had rather a strong impression that it was answerable - very MUCH so - to the Council on Foreign Relations and it's affiliated groups. There's the REAL filth..!! You should look into it. Everyone should. It's probably a good thing to have some inkling how the country is run.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPlvdSQ6cAM

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q="council+on+foreign+relations"+media&btnG=Search

Andy K · Jul 25, 2008

Lets hope the message gets through to local councils too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/7522016.stm

Sparky · Jul 25, 2008

You really have to wonder about the mentality of people who would assume that 'attacking paedophiles' would need to make photographs first... I just find that very QUEER.

Aurum · Jul 25, 2008

Andy K said:
Lets hope the message gets through to local councils too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/7522016.stm

I'd have sent in my 7 year old with his camera instead to take pictures instead. THAT would have blown her fuses

phfitz · Jul 26, 2008

Photographing thugs is 'assault'? I guess that is the difference between citizens, subjects or mere residents, as appears to be the case in Merry Old England since joining the EU. Personally, I would suggest that you Brits dig in your heels and fight to the last man standing on this because if you continue to accept it, it becomes 'acceptable behavior'.

Marco B · Jul 26, 2008

The moment the European Union accepted to hand over any personal details pertaining people going on a international flights to the US, with the data ending up in the hands of the US security agencies with, from a practical viewpoint no control on what, how and for how long this data is being kept or used, this battle was lost...

I also remember that little but courageous counter action of Brazilian authorities deciding to start to fingerprint and photograph any US citizen arriving on airports in Brazil, infuriating the passengers, but actually, the US had been doing exactly the same thing to Brazilian citizens... Unfortunately, they did not keep it up...

This kind of public protest is the ONLY way to stop this madness... and make the authorities see the ridiculousness of these measures.

Larry Bullis · Jul 26, 2008

Marco B said:
...

This kind of public protest is the ONLY way to stop this madness... and make the authorities see the ridiculousness of these measures.

Even if you rub their noses in it they won't see it. The can't. They'd all lose their jobs for saying "the emperor has no clothes on". They will make up whatever they have to, regardless of how much trouble it is, to avoid seeing it. I think they have to take a test to get their jobs to begin with. The ones who have any concept of reality are systematically weeded out.

I've just seen far too much of this stuff to be able to pretend that there's not a problem.

Sorry.

House of Lords awakes from slumber

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency