鈥楽mile, you鈥檙e on Candid Camera.鈥� That was the punchline of a TV show that ran for more than 50 years and was at its most popular in the 1960s. People became victims of pranks and at the last moment were informed they were being filmed by a hidden camera. The aim was to get laughs.
There are many more hidden cameras these days, and not everyone is laughing. It鈥檚 wise to remember that evolving technology is always a two-edged sword.
On the positive side, the plethora of cameras can help reduce and solve crimes. On the negative side, it has become incredibly easy to invade people鈥檚 privacy, on purpose or inadvertently.
In January, a thief rummaging around in a boat on the Gorge Waterway made his film debut, thanks to a surveillance camera placed by the boat鈥檚 owner. The recorded video image enabled police to identify the boat burglar as a suspect they already had in custody in connection with the theft of another boat.
In March, homeowners in the Cadboro Bay area set up a trail camera (usually used to capture images of wildlife with little human interference) after becoming suspicious of the intentions of a man they found prowling on their property. They caught clear images of a man trying to break into their home, and gave the images to police.
Surveillance cameras are everywhere: at automatic cash machines, in stores, at business entrances, along streets and, increasingly, guarding people鈥檚 homes, inside and out. The technology is inexpensive and easy to use.
The government of China has built up a network of more than 20 million surveillance cameras, ostensibly for safety reasons, but in reality, the cameras are a heavy-handed tool for suppressing dissent. sa国际传媒 hasn鈥檛 reached that point, and likely never will, but the growing number of cameras is still cause for concern, and it raises questions.
You can set up a surveillance camera to watch over your backyard, but if the view includes your neighbour鈥檚 yard, are you invading someone鈥檚 privacy? You might be photographed (without your permission) a dozen different times walking along a street 鈥� should that be allowed? You take a video of someone doing something silly and post it on the Internet with comments 鈥� are you slandering them?
Print and broadcast photojournalists have long worked under laws and codes of conduct regarding the publication of images, and know there are lines that shouldn鈥檛 be crossed, figuratively and literally.
Many people might not be aware they are publishing an image or a video when they post it on the Internet, but the same laws apply. Even if you are not a professional photographer working for a news outlet, you can still be sued for defamation of character or prosecuted for invasion of privacy. Think about that the next time you hold your smartphone up in the air to photograph someone doing something embarrassing.
On the other hand, those ubiquitous camera phones were the key to catching and prosecuting culprits involved in Vancouver鈥檚 Stanley Cup riot. Some rioters were actually performing for the cameras, laughing while they committed acts of destruction, assault and theft. They were hoisted on their own digital petards.
It might be tempting to call for more laws governing the use of cameras, but we have laws aplenty that already apply. What鈥檚 needed is simply old-fashioned courtesy and consideration for others.
It鈥檚 good that the proliferation of cameras makes life more difficult for thieves and other ill-intended people, but the rest of us should be aware of the increasing odds that we will be caught on camera, and not always on smile-worthy occasions.
