Freedom of Expression, the right to privacy, and the publication of photographs

[Sam]

Hmmm.

So some lovely feathers got a little ruffled when suddenly the beautiful body beneath them wound up in a newspaper article as part of the public domain.

It's clearly not ok to use someone's image in the public sphere without their consent.
And once an image is out there it's too late to rectify.

So do we ban cameras at the burn?
Possibly. Though it seems somewhat extreme. And that will be hard to enforce.
Not to mention how wonderful it is to browse through everyone's facebook albums afterwards and briefly plug back into that world.

Do we get stronger about this guideline and impose a rule that no potentially embarrassing photos can be made public?
I've assumed till this point that we are all capable of using our discretion to determine what may cause someone embarrassment or damage. And I've assumed also that my fellows will respect my right to privacy even while I exercise freedom of expression. But suddenly it seems that can no longer be relied upon.
Surely it is obvious that if I am running around topless in tankwa it does not mean I'll be happy to see images of that in a national newspaper?

If we do impose that rule, does the public sphere include the facebook pages, or flicker albums, or blogs of individuals who are not professional press/photographers?
It's a complicated issue . . .

[Ard]

Photography is both art and a form of expression, thus has a place at AfrikaBurn. Some people feel that photography cramps their style, and limits their freedom of expression. Perhaps it does, but then again the sheer number of Cape Town people has a similar effect We need to find a balance between the two.

We do have guidelines (I need to look at them again!), and these should be widely publicised. They should also be debated in the forum, so that we can get as wide a concensus as possible about what is appropriate.

[IB Dazzled]

What is very interesting is that nudity at our small sista event in the States - Burningman is HUGE and yet hardly any pictures appear on the Intaweb. Its not that they are not being taken, Burners in the States are just very respectful of taking pictures of other people. The photographer asks the subject of the portrait if they can snap or not. This is for their own records. They do not publish these pictures on the web. This is just the right thing to do. Always think what would I feel like if I had pictures of this nature of myself posted on the internet. The old age saying of when in doubt , do nothing also applies.
It would be a pity to stop photography as it is an art form. It is wonderful to come home and relive all the memories of the burn through clicking through pics.
Just be respectful in all that you do. This is what the burner community is about. We encourage all participants to express themselves radically. This can only happen in a safe space.
I believe in education, not policing and certainly not banning anything.

[burningdan]

I choose nudity over photography.
people lie and don't do what they're told, so they will still photograph nudity and publish it.

in my heart I want AfrikaBurn to become sacred over time and not commercial
more cameras = more commercial.

I say we have a dozen registered togs (who have tog shirts) who are trusted by the AB community.
this event is about being 'there', completely present and free from worldy shit. not about taking photos of how cool we look in dress up in the desert.

peace.d

[Paul Greenfella]

Brrrrrrr this is a long way off from being resolved on any level......... Lauren messed up by publishing in the MG, the chap from the beeld also broke the rules and should have got his ass smacked lekker hard live on CTV..... Flickr/Picasso are online storage systems and possibly stock ........ FarceBook is well what it is, sloppy and all over the place, much like many perverts snapping away at any bare fleshed women at the burn...... It is good to have photographers that the community trusts....................... there is no way you are going to ban anything, let alone cameras the size of a lighter or smoke box.................. education, strick guidelines and past event enforcement to set preseident is needed....................... make the commerical buggers fork out for their indiscretions....... personaly I expect to be asked if I want to be photographed, that is my constitutional right.....however there will always be those who just don't give a dam.........and here in lies the challenge

ps np smell check used

[Senor Neek]

Brrrrrrr this is a long way off from being resolved on any level......... Lauren messed up by publishing in the MG, the chap from the beeld also broke the rules and should have got his ass smacked lekker hard live on CTV..... .........and here in lies the challenge

ps np smell check used

Paul, i couldn't agree more. Those photos published on mg.co.za were OUT.OF.LINE. Many of us don't have the luxury of employers or professions where being photo'd dressed up as a drum majorette while drinking margaritas out of a high-heeled shoe in the middle of the desert is viewed as humourous or even remotely acceptable behaviour. In my case, a photo like that would screw my current job. I'm thus not convinced that having "sanctioned" photogs are the way to go...

The problem is that the media in SA are too inclined to view AB as a freak show - with added nudity for extra salaciousness. Banning official media representatives would be preferable but inadvisable.

As for banning personal cameras, I have to disagree as such a move would run contrary to the whole ethos of openness and inclusiveness.

Perhaps, we should ask the BM guys how they managed to maintain their principles when so many attend? The issue here is that same as that of MOOP, namely, how do we convey the guiding principles to newbies or to those that simply couldn't give a damn?

[mikesuss]

Burning Man has clear guidelines for media at Black Rock City, dealing specifically with the issue of publication. AFAIK, media attending the event are obliged to sign some sort of contract. I know we initiated media registration at our early events too, so this is clearly something we need to revisit and clarify.

M

[Paul Greenfella]

Thanks for the feed back Mike.....

The media could be described as social media also, where individuals publish nude images without permission for profit or not, it still remains un-ethical....

All and all the spirit and guiding tenants should clarify this..

[Senor Neek]

Burning Man has clear guidelines for media at Black Rock City, dealing specifically with the issue of publication. AFAIK, media attending the event are obliged to sign some sort of contract. I know we initiated media registration at our early events too, so this is clearly something we need to revisit and clarify.

M

Hi Paul,

Yeah, that would be the way us old toppies (i.e. >30) feel. However, the digital natives have a different approach to personal privancy (and copyright, but that's a whole different discussion entirely).

When a guy like Mark Zuckerberg says the following, we should take notice:

"Talking at the Crunchie awards in San Francisco this weekend, the 25-year-old chief executive of the world's most popular social network said that privacy was no longer a "social norm".
"People have really gotten comfortable not only sharing more information and different kinds, but more openly and with more people," he said. "That social norm is just something that has evolved over time.""
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...cebook-privacy

So, how do we navigate terrain that's basically uncharted? The question is whether we are we an OPEN society or are we a CLOSED one...

My 20c's worth is that we ask official media representatives to sign in blood / undertake / warrant / promise on their grandaddy's grave to abide by a (to be determined) set of rules.

As for everyone else - well, they'll have to be guided by their consciences / Burner spirit. And THAT is the reason that we need to find a way to inculcate the AB Principles in as many burners as possible...to achieve a critical mass of burners that not only preaches Afrikaburn but also practices its principles.

[metastofasis]

I am a naturist and personally don't give a crap about anyone taking photo's and I think that I was the only person that made it onto the Aerocam naked last Burn. I do however know that many folk are still really concerned about friends/family/colleagues/customers seeing them with kit off. Some people want to be daring but are too wary of being snapped by some or other camera. I was asked by several people if it was okay if they photograph me and since I don't have a problem, said yes. I was very impressed that they asked to be quite honest. If cameras are banned, you still have cellphones, mini cams etc. and it would spoil it for me (and our friends) if we did not have the memories.
Perhaps an option is to make it one of the clauses that get signed on entry, and if found to be transgressed, ban that ID number for life. No second chances. Someone will always know who posted a photo.
Our lives have changed since AB and we live our lives from April to April. Taking photo's away is not necessary, just try and take those who don't play by the rules out of the AB equation.