Photography,paedophilia and terrorism

Hi,friends...i enjoy reading photo mags and have noticed a disturbing trend lately- the amount of articles and

letters outlining bad experiences whilst out shooting. Here's an example from my neck of the woods (Western

Australia)...a man was in his own backyard trying his new camera. It was pointed at the local park ,amongst other

directions, and within 30 minutes the police were knocking on his door responding to complaints that he was

"perving" on children. To say that he was shocked, outraged and traumatised would not be an understatement. A

photographer in London, shooting the houses of parliament, was stopped and questioned- in public view- regarding

his "actions". Dozens of other snappers were ignored. His "error'? A DSLR and, worst of all, a TRIPOD. A woman on

a beach in England loudly criticised a photographer for taking pictures of children, including hers, "secretly".

Humiliated, the gentleman showed her the pics in his lcd which showed nothing more than the lighthouse on the

hill above the beach. I can take photos of my sons playing Australian Rules football or soccer, but if I pull out

my dslr at my daughter's netball game? In fact, i walked around that netball centre...there must have been about

30 games in progress...and you know what? Not one single camera! All those memories which should be re-lived

again and again just left on the courts. What the heck is going on? Anyone?

I know here in the Midwest USA we dont seem to have that problem but on a trip to Cleveland OH a friend was questioned and i wasnt we both had dslrs it we were both downtown my first thought was maybe because i was a girl i didnt look threatening just a thought

 

 

Amber

"Fear is the mind killer."

I've said it before on these type of threads. It is in incumbant governments' interests for us to be in some kind of state of fear. As an Aussie, like myself, you would know of Howard's politics of fear (remember the "Be alert but not alarmed" fridge magnet!)? Thankfully, so far, the Rudd government hasn't had to resort to fear mongering, so I'm hoping things might improve a little bit in Australia. Everyone has been whipped up into such a state of fear over the last decade or so, they think that every south-asian or middle eastern person is a terrorist, and any male who has anything to do with children is a paedophile. And to be fair to governments, the media has to wear a significant part of the blame.

Martijn...is that a Frank Herbert quote?

Mark, yes it is, from his book <i>Dune</i>. But it was used earlier in Aldous Huxley's <i>Island</i>.

Mark

 

Nice biblical name, by the way. I'm glad to see we can spread around the conservative, bible carrying, right-wing do-gooders.

I was afraid it was only in the US. Look at the number of groups, in the name of protecting children, that want to censor what

not just children, but adults also view, listen to, and read!

 

I was chairperson of a county library board of directors for a few years and I was surprised and appalled at the number of

people who wanted us to pull certain types of books, CD's, DVD's and video games from the library's shelves. Subject

matter in question included sex (of course), religion, race, violence, authority, science, philosophy, medicine, government,

cartoons, astronomy, astrology, witches, monsters, fortune-telling ... the list goes on and on. You name a subject and

someone will want to keep if from libraries.

 

It is amazing what ideas people want to "protect" others from.

 

Please remember it is television programs, movies, music and video games that is causing children to become mass

murderers, juvenile delinquents, sociopaths, bad students, gays, lesbians, to stop accepting God and Jesus as the one and

only savior, and to suck their thumbs and pick their noses in public. May God or Goddess protect us from thinking or

accepting other's views.

 

Luckily I do not find children photography particularly interesting. I'm sure I would be hauled down to the station house with

the rest of the perverts.

 

Please be assured that your country is not alone in strange people. At least in your country if you see something with a

pouch hopping around it may just be a kangaroo. Here, we think it is probably the crazy old lady who lives next door.

Paranoia runs rampant everywhere. Just because you think others are out to get you doesn’t necessarily make you

paranoid. They may very well be out to get you!

 

Mark

I put it down to Cheneyism, where fear and morality have infused itself into the notion of the presumption of guilt and pre-

emptive arrests. People and some law enforcrement are more willing to assume their worse fears and take action where

nothing exists and the innonence of people is lost. As some would say, it's easier to apologize to the innoncent for making

a mistake than to the victim(s) for not taking action. So action based on fear and morality become the norm, and

photographers are easy targets and now fair game.

You just had to make this political didn't you. How can you put the blame on Right wing conservatives, or Cheney when for eight years we had that "Perv" Bill Clinton chasing interns around the oval office instead of doing anything about national security. A few preemptive arrests certainly would have been better than what happened on 9/11.

Scott,

 

I'd call it "Nancy Grace-ism". There in fact are a (very, very) few people who get cameras and then go out to

shoot "upskirts", women in changeing rooms, and the like, one finally gets caught, and good old Nancy, and her

local counterparts start their shows with "WAKE UP, AMERICA! THEY'RE EVERYWHERE!"

 

From there you can then count on that part of the population that needs to and wants to get wound up over

SOMETHING going out to harass the next male they see with a camera. I mean, if you're not taking a picture of the

Grand Canyon, or Aunt Minnie standing in front of her new car, or a subject they understand ( a limited field), then

you must UP TO NO GOOD!

 

I've recently been slogging through Will and Ariel Durant's history of Western Civilization, and the phenomenon

certainly isn't new, heretics witches and the like have always been pointed out and prosecuted by the "good

citizens". But now it's far easier to fire up more people in more places in less time...God Bless Cable TV.

I've wondered about "what's going on" as well. I have an innate distrust of the government (predicated on "hard knocks") that leads me down certain lines of thought. I think it must go beyond selling fear to all of us. After all, why photography? Why tripods, for heaven's sake? Why not loitering? Why not innocent things like wrapping up one's face in a scarf during cold weather (which conceals one's identity)? Why aren't these things suspect? A TRIPOD? Come on!

 

When things like these don't make sense on the surface (even superficially), I have to wonder whether there's something deeper to it.

 

The fact is that we have become a society of amateur photojournalists. Everyone has a camera, and many of us have good cameras. Right now, the photographers facing these measures are the people with higher-end cameras and TRIPODS [gasp!], which are more often associated with photojournalism than, say, compact digitals and cell phone cameras. We all know that the government does NOT like news reporting, so I'm thinking that photojournalism is being impaired through a massive social engineering initiative to place a soft ban on higher-end photography. The goal is to get us accustomed to the practice of leaving our cameras at home, to avoid the hassle, Either that or to put away our cameras on command, without protest. Bans will spread and expand, until our society of amateur photojournalists finds itself without essential reporting tools, and even professional photojournalists' activities are severely impaired.

 

What of cell phone cameras? My crystal ball is a bit cloudy, but this is what I think I see: I bet the specter of these cameras being used for nefarious activities (e.g. perverts photographing other people in restrooms) will lead to government mandates on camera disabling features in newer cell phone models, coupled with upgrades to new network protocols. This will force the retirement of obsolete cell phones that do not have the camera disabling features. We can only guess how this system will work, but I bet it will be driven by GPS (which is currently mandated on cell phones). Hot spots such as restrooms and public places and government buildings will be mapped out, and the cell phone companies will be charged with remote-disabling of cameras in those zones. And then there will be some DHS call for spot disabling, whereby a "peace officer" can radio in a coordinate and disable cell phone cameras within a given radius for a certain period of time, for instance used in the vicinity of politicians and "trouble" spots where law enforcement officials are active. In fact, for the protection of our peace officers, there could be a de-facto cell phone camera blackout within a 100 ft radius of all law enforcement personnel. Dunno.

 

In the end, these and other measures will allow our governments to abridge the activities of the press in the name of public safety, so they can do whatever they want, without too many people learning about it.

 

This is only the beginning. Mark my words.

I remember this from Pastor Martin Niemoller:-

 

"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--

because I was not a communist;

Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--

because I was not a socialist;

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--

because I was not a trade unionist;

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--

because I was not a Jew;

Then they came for me--

and there was no one left to speak out for me."

 

Now they're coming for the photographers.

I think some of you are just being paranoid. You can thank the internet for alot of this. You hear of a few isolated incidents of photographers being harrased by overzealous cops or security guards or the like and you blame the (federal) government. How many of you have actually had this problem yourselves. You can usually chalk this up to lack of training or knowledge of the laws by a few local cops, usually rookies, (and that is usually on a city or county level) and go out and shoot what you like. Or you can sit around and be afraid and blame the "the federal government". Ooh Big Brother is watching.

I just posted ''shy in street photography'', but I think that maybe right term would be ''afraid''...I worked for a few years on a cruise ships as a photographer...people sometimes had really aggressive attitude towards photographers and that was the time when I first asked myself what is going on....I had some similar situations...I have feeling that I have to be very carefully with photography on public places....I am not saying that it is case everywhere, but let's say that I know what are you talking about....:))

I've often wondered, and worried a bit about what will be thought of me when I'm out with my rb-67, and tripod. I love to shoot archetectural details, and I'm sure that some one out there (with waaay to much time on their hands) may see me as a threat ( I also have facial hair Gasp). Yet, I've not had any one approach me, except a few people who have never seen a camera like mine. Also, when my Daughter was playing sports in grade, and high school, I was always at the games with my old srt-101, taking roll after roll of the action, and was never hasseled by any of the other parents. I photographed all of the girls playing, and at the next game I would give their parents the shots of them playing, and if I couldn't locate them, I would give the shots to the coach. I'm sure that this problem of over reacting parents, and law enforcement officials happens, but remember; if we choose to live in fear, the bad guys have won.

Curtis, you can call us paranoid, but the fact remains that there are some very peculiar, ongoing bans on some very harmless photography -- documented and verified

 

"Now they're coming for the photographers." Yup. Prior to that, they were coming for the minorities. My son is mixed race and looks a bit Middle Eastern. He cannot walk through an airport without getting harrassed by authorities and detained for questioning, no matter how well he dresses or how cleanly he shaves.

 

Just a thought about reaction from people, rather than governments: I remember once doing some research on finger lengths (long story). My preferred method of data collection was to photocopy people's hands. I had numerous people refuse to participate because they thought I might be collecting fingerprints for the government (which were visible in the photocopies). I've also experienced a lot of people being apprehensive of my photographing buildings that they own. One of them came out to talk with me, carrying a shotgun. I might have been photographing a barn, for instance. Most assume I'm taking photographs for some sort of local government or finance purposes -- appraisals, foreclosures, or whatever. When they find out I'm photographing their barn for artwork, they look at me like I'm weird and then tell me I can carry on. Anyway, there are a lot of people who feel squeezed under the "thumb" of the "system," and perhaps that's part of the reaction we're experiencing as photographers. Fear is everywhere, after all.

My experience: A couple of months ago, I went to the park close to my home. I wanted to test my new 80-400 with

the birds there. After 30 minutes a security agent came to me to tell me that some of the people were complaining

about the possibility that I was a perderast. I was shocked. I hadn´t even realized that there were children, and for

sure I didn´t shot at them. So the agent told me he knew that, but they were still complaining. I decided to go back

home.

 

Maybe I should have had to defend my right to shot birds in the park, but....

 

If I should have been a pederast, I think I should have used a slim point and shot, or even better a mobile., but people

is aware only of DSLRs (gun machines to them).

 

It´s a shame. I´ve never tried street photography, and I think I will never do. Too many problems to carry your gun

machine in public.....

Fear is big business. Look behind the scenes for the motivation. It's about consolidation of power and control. Those who implement the control will profit.

 

And check the portfolios of folks who make disdainful remarks about these incidents. Often their portfolios are full of pastoral scenes. They don't expose themselves to risk so they can be forgiven for their ignorance. Context and location are significant factors. Even street and documentary photographers and photojournalists report remarkably different experiences, which may be due to their locations and other factors that are not readily apparent.

I am not saying that these things don't happen, or that photographers don't have any reason to be a little nervous

sometimes, I get a little nervous myself sometimes when shooting in downtown streets or when stopping to shoot

someones old rundown barn. What I am saying is that you can't blame all of this on the Federal Government. As

some have stated earlier, it was paranoid neighbors, property owners or concerned parents at sporting events, or just

plain inexperienced and under-trained law enforcement personel causing the problems, not the FBI, or the CIA, or

George Bush, or Dick Cheney. Alot of the paranoia can be attributed to 9/11 but I don't believe you can blame that

on the current administration either. Now they are responsible for some of the restrictions put in place after 9/11,

but they couldn't have done it without the backing of the Congress, people seem to forget that there are 3 branches

of Gov. in the U.S. with powers divided equally ( at least in theory).

i think jm coetzee has something to say about this, particularly in australia, in his new(ish) "diary of a bad year". it's more than fear, but also diminishing respect for art.

They are not few and isolated. I have been questioned numerious times. When i ask if I am braking the law, the answer is

always no. That`s real cops. Rent a cops are way different and have really big heads.

 

Today a cop kept me under survelience 20 sec for driving 23 in a 25 zone. They get real teed off when they get stuck

behind me and I am going the speed limit on a local street. What are they going to do ? Give a ticket for not speeding!

 

You would think they had better stuff to do.

Mark, I hear where you are coming from. On the one hand we see a suspicious country that is told people are

foraging their trash to steal their identity. And then the widespread U Tube and camera phone experience where

it seems no personal faux pas can be private. This kind of tension is what I have come to expect. I think it will

level off to a point where we can all coexist. Worrriers, privacy seekers, street shooters, tourists, and

documenters too. Looking at the bright side, at least in Western Australia, you won't get a rifle butt in your

back and get tossed into a cell with some uniformed State Police asking " Your papers, and your passport..." And

then a check against Interpol records. Wait, that happens too often in too many photogenic countries! Ohmygosh.

back to macros of insects and flower buds.

The irony is that there's probably more photographic leeway in China (as evidenced by the number of photos posted here at PN) than there is in London, England. Go figure.

Top news in Calgary (city of 1 million) yesterday, along with the stock market crash and election:

 

http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20081007/CGY_park_pictures_081007/20081007?hub=CalgaryHome

 

Stuff like this just propagates paranoia and fear.

 

I shot a wedding last month, inlaw, pro photog was present, I was asked by the b+g to shoot some candids. Reception was at a golf clubhouse. Before dinner we're having cocktail hour, adults getting loaded, flower girls out playing on the fairway, running around. While I take a few distant candid photos of the kids (nice golden hour light, they turned out great) one drunk relative who I don't know steps up and asks me if I'm a pervert.

 

If I ever do go pro, I will have a little check box in the contract where the b+g will have to initial, giving me permssion to shoot kids. Otherwise I won't do it, period.

p.s

 

the person in the news article is not me!