I was having a good day wandering around Myrtle Edwards Park for the Fourth of Jul-Ivar’s festivities until someone sicced the security goons on me. Apparently a parent had decided that since I was taking pictures of kids playing in the surf at one of the small beach areas, I was some creepy scumbag who had to be brought to heel.
One security guy came up to me and pulled me aside, telling me that there had been complaints that I was taking pictures of children.
“Were you taking pictures of children?”
Well, yeah, I had been, along with quite a few other things. Knowing this was a battle I wasn’t about to win, I offered to delete the photos.
“Can I see your camera?”
I pulled up the picture display and scrolled to the most recent shots. Sure enough, there was the damning evidence — pictures of fully-clothed children, playing in the surf on a public beach during a public festival. He keyed his intercom and called another security guard over to look at the shots.
The two of them flipped through the shots, shaking their heads. Obviously, I was Bad People and had to be Brought Under Control. After watching me delete all the offending photos from my camera, they explained to me that while they couldn’t really prevent me from taking pictures, they would certainly be keeping an eye on me if I chose to remain in the area. “We’ll be watching you.”
That being quite the mood-killer, I figured it was best just to leave.
Now, before anyone accuses me of being too self-righteous, what bugs me the most isn’t that some parent might have been a little alarmed about some strange man taking pictures of their kid. What annoys me is the “guilty until proven innocent” mentality that prompted them to run to security instead of approaching me and either asking what I was doing or, if I’d taken any shots of their kid, to delete them. The same mentality that made the security personnel treat me as if in their minds, I was there for the sole purpose of taking pictures of children to go home and masturbate to (regardless of the many other shots of landscapes, water, Mt. Ranier, the Seattle skyline, and the tripod slung over my shoulder for fireworks shots later on in the evening). The same attitude that finished the little interview — after I’d voluntarily deleted all the shots, with them looking over my shoulder — with the warning that, “we’ll be watching you.”
So, I’m back at home. I’ve got a ticket to watch Batman in about half an hour, and then I’ll see if I feel like wandering back down there to try to get some shots of the fireworks or not.
Happy Fourth of July everyone. You know — independence, liberty, freedom, and civil rights and all that.
1 Trackbacks
Culture of Fear grows
Michael Hanscom talks about an experience yesterday (July 4th 2005):
21 Comments
Unfortunately, this is more about timing than anything you may have done. The recent story about the girl found in the company of a registered offender after being abducted.
Frustrating that no one could actually talk to you, ie one of the parents, to find out what was going on.
Be glad you had a digital camera: you might have had to cough up the whole roll.
It’s understandable why she did it, and I agree with your point of view. I think a lot of people just freak out too much over the littlest things these days.
I sometimes joke with my girlfriend that in the future us guys won’t be allowed near children. Stories like your make me think that maybe it really will happen.
Of course, me being me, I would have told them I have every right to take photos of anyone and anything in a public space and would have asked them to call in the SPD - who would have verified my claim and told the security guards to go chase drunks or something. God, do I really hate authority, or what. Have a great Fourth of July and just remember that there are those like me out there who are destined to give these types of people a really, really hard time and make them wish they had chosen another “type” to pick on. Stand up for your rights - do NOT be intimidated - especially when the law’s on your side. To the guards, I would have asked them to go back to the parents and suggest if the parents were that afraid to remove themselves and their children from this area - that would have been the correct response. Grrrrr.
Ugh, jackasses.
We’ve entered the age of fear, where everyone is afraid of everyone else. This is exactly the sort of environment that terrorism is intended to create, and it seems they have accomplished their goal.
Sorry Wudi. I’ve thought you were walking a tightrope for a very long time now.
During the time that I spent working for the ADN, there were very specific rules on shooting during a public event, and most of the time, the crowd wasn’t on the list. If I did take a picture of a non-participant audience member, I was required to go up to them (and their parent, if a minor), tell them who I was, what I was doing, what my contact info was, and get permission to use the image. If I got their information, then I could use the image. Every time. My press badge didn’t get me out of that, although I do imagine it would have helped with the hired goons, if I’d ever been turned in.
I think that this is an example of the difference between blogging and journalism. There are rules to public news-watching, and someone has to tell one what they are. A journalist, without a direct thought to their talent, gets this training. You may have a far better eye than I did for photography, and a far better writing style, but without that training, you’re not a journalist.
While there’s a definate downer on the getting harrassed, I do agree with IO Error and others, the fear of some level 3 sex offender would prompt me to go to a security officer first as well, when in defense of KAS. That may have changed in the last 18 months, but I have a hard time remembering what I thought before she was born.
I just just wondering to myself how the situation would have gone if you had announced you were with the local newspaper or something… CPS seems to have answered that, and I can see the necessity of asking permission before taking pictures of strangers and minors.
But just for attitude’s sake - I am constantly reminded of the scenes in Michael Moore’s Bowling for Columbine where Mr. Moore is interviewing some Canadians about whether they lock their doors and whether they feel safe where they live and most of them said that they don’t lock their doors and that they do feel safe. I think the attitude among Americans is a lot different. I see a lot of paranoia and fear and peolpe are willing to give up a lot of rights to feel safe. Key words: FEEL SAFE. Hell, where I work [a used bookstore] we have account forms to open trade accounts for used books and parts of the forms require you to fill out an address and phone number which we use strictly for account verification purposes only. But, at least a few times a day you get the people who refuse to fill out the paper work - which is their right, but then they cannot trade with us and if they are okay with that, then we’re okay with that. Then there’s the one of those few who is not okay with that and raises holy hell, and still doesn’t get their way. But you should see the fear in these people’s eyes because they would swear on a stack of bibles that YOU would follow them home, rape aand kill them and steal all their money, too.
America, in my opinion, no longer stands for life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. I don’t believe in the American Dream and I was less than inclined to celebrate the fourth of July.
Un(?)fortunately, I have a strong — perhaps overly so — non-confrontational nature, and my first response in such situations is often to back down. I was hoping that being polite, apologizing for having inadvertently alarmed anyone, and voluntarily (though not happily) erasing the photos might have been enough to convince the security guards that I wasn’t a threat. By their actions, though, it clearly wasn’t going to be enough, and I was given a fairly clear choice between leaving, and remaining knowing that I was going to be essentially kept under observation — and who knows what their next step would have been had I aimed my camera anywhere that looked to them like there might be a kid in view.
(sigh) I love how statements like this always come up after the shit hits the proverbial fan.
That’s a different situation, though — from everything I’ve read, there’s a difference between private photography and for-profit photography which requires (in some cases) a model release. It may even be the case that the ADN was operating on tougher guidelines than what is strictly necessary, in order to reduce the possibility of potential lawsuits.
For example, in section 5.2 of this excellent overview of when model releases may or may not be required, Dan Heller has this to say:
However, that’s quite tangential to my situation. Personal photography in a public place is something that, to date, is still quite permissible and legal. According to the photographer’s rights guide assembled by attorney Bert P. Krages II:
Between Heller’s look at the (admittedly, often slightly hazy) guidelines for model releases and Krages’ guide for public photography, I’m quite sure that I was doing nothing wrong.
Whether someone likes what I’m doing, or is comfortable with it, is another matter entirely. Had the parents of any of the children deigned to speak to me — either on their own, or coming with the security guards rather than simply sending them out to corral me — I would gladly have explained my status as a (very) amateur photographer, offered them one of the cards I carry with me with links both to this site and to my Flickr pages, and let them know that if they weren’t comfortable with their child being in my photographs, then I would apologize and erase those photos.
When you say that you would be likely to contact a security officer in a similar situation, I do hope that you would at least either accompany them to talk with the photographer, or let them know that you would be willing to talk with the photographer if requested in order to clear things up (whether that involved allowing them to keep the photos or asking them to erase them), rather than simply sending them off to harass someone who’s only crime was pointing a camera in a direction you weren’t comfortable with.
And I make no claims at being a journalist. While some have suggested that I have enough of an eye for photography and flair for writing (compliments which are greatly appreciated, I must admit) that I might make a good photojournalist, I’m fully cognizant that I have no formal training in either discipline. The cards I carry with me to give to people list “babbling and amateur photography” under my name, and I would certainly make no claims otherwise on either count.
Again, what bothers me most about this is not that I inadvertently alarmed someone. While I may personally find it overly paranoid, I do understand that our society is currently being quite well trained to be overly paranoid, and damn the consequences.
What bothers me is that I was not given the chance to explain myself. That I was immediately deemed a threat. That even after attempting to explain and doing everything in my power to assuage any fears or concerns, I was still quite obviously regarded as, if not an overt threat, than certainly someone worthy of intimidation and greater scrutiny. I didn’t even know who my accuser was — there may have only been one or two photos that actually would have needed deletion had the parents spoken to me, but I ended up losing all of that set of photos.
In short, having done nothing wrong, I was accused and subsequently tried and condemned in the eyes of the security personnel (judging by how they treated me), and possibly in the eyes of whatever parent or parents that contacted them, of being guilty of one of the most heinous crimes imaginable.
Keep in mind that any laws about photograph are about republishing—which is what most journalists are into doing. There is no law denying you the right to just photograph whomever the hell you please.
I don’t consider myself to be very paranoid at all. However, had I been a parent in this situation, it would make more sense to me to approach you and have a conversation with you, mostly to feel you out. Also, having done that, I could pick you out of a line-up later. =P
…but of course, it wasn’t me. It was some paranoid retard who saw you (probably) wearing all black and taking pictures. That ‘goth kids worship devils’ mentality along with child molester paranoia makes no happy matches. At least you were able to take it all in stride.
Wow. Just… wow. Truly Management By Fear. I’ve seen similar stories every now and then, and they always come from the US.
North American culture is really strange to us Europeans. Sometimes we wonder what planet you’re all from.
…and I should really bring my camera out more often.
Maybe not to Pom’s.
We all know the Story/ Urban Myth about the London couple who took photo’s of their two kids in the Bath, using film, and had them developed at the local Boot’s.One of the Sales Assistants saw these photo’s on the Conveyer Belt and called Family Services.
Family Services Allegedly rocked up with the police and had the Couple Arrested on KP charges due to photos of their kids in the Bath!
Personally, I think you should go back to exact spot and continue taking your pictures. This time however, you should take a copy of Mr Krages II’s downloadable flyer and if you’re approached again by the police, let them have a read.
I agree with Chas. I probably would have told the rent-a-cop to kindly piss off.
This morning (before reading the posts after my original comment), I remembered this post from 2002, and I decided that I was technically wrong about the “legality” of public photography.
On the other hand, I also asked myself, If you’re taking pictures of folks, why wait for them to approach you? If you expect folks to approach you to ask you what you’re doing, why shouldn’t you approach them first, and find out how big their privacy bubble is?
If you want them to trust that you’re on the up-and-up, tell folks what you’re doing, give them a business card with your email address and phone number on it, and offer them the opportunity to download the pictures and get reprints. If they like what they find, they might even offer you some pay pal or something like that.
I guess my point is that only celebrities should be subject to paparazzi. Good manners should give the rest of us an opt-out clause before the pictures are taken. To me, this isn’t about your rights, but about the ethics of shared public areas.
You got hosed by the rent-a-cops not having the mental gymnastics to see this side of the story, but you could have mitigated some of this by taking a few extra seconds to look around and see if anyone was watching you too, and go talk to them before they went to the rent-a-cops. The communication thing is a two-way street, after all.
Oh, and yes, I do think you have the skills to do photography and writing professionally. If you decide to leave geeking behind, I hope you’ll consider the idea.
I certainly have no problems with that — it is why I carry these cards around with me, after all — aside from one simple thing: logistics. When there’s 10-15 (at least) kids running around on a beach, and half to one-third as many adults standing far back from the water watching them all run around, it’s not exactly a simple prospect to narrow down which kid(s) belong to which adult(s). While the mental image of me standing up, pointing to one kid or another, and yelling out, “Hey! Who belongs to this one?” is amusing, it doesn’t seem terribly practical (or reassuring to the parents, for that matter).
I’m also not entirely oblivious to my surroundings. While I was concentrating more on getting shots of the kids in the water than the adults sitting on logs further back, I was certainly aware that the adults were there, and kept an eye out in case I was getting any obvious stares, glares, or suspicious glances. Admittedly, that wasn’t my main focus, but I didn’t notice anything, nor did anyone appear to be taking much interest in me.
I’m paranoid enough about candid shots of strangers (something I’m actually working on getting over, and I’ve found that large public festivals such as this one, or Bumbershoot, Folklife, etc., are great for random “street” photography, as the number of people and prevalence of cameras generally tends to make people a little less jumpy if they notice a camera aimed in their general direction) that there’s no way I’m going to just callously disregard the environment beyond what’s in my viewfinder. However, if I don’t notice a potential trouble spot, than all I can do is hope that I’m at least given the chance to explain myself and try to calm any fears or suspicions.
Thanks much! If all goes well (and I’m keeping my fingers crossed, knocking on wood, and all that), I should be getting back into school soon. While my final destination is still up in the air — I figure I’ve got at least a year or two (depending on how much I can test out of) of getting the generic stuff out of the way before I have to choose a focus point — photography, journalism (or some form of writing), or a combination of the two is certainly one of the (many) options floating around in my head.
‘Course, the last thing you want (now or then) is confrontation, but..
“In short, having done nothing wrong, I was accused and subsequently tried and condemned in the eyes of the security personnel…”
Which is why I would have sought the aid of an on-duty SPD officer and brought the two together and asked the SPD to remind the security types that we were still on public property and that, by the rules for public property, I had every right to take the pictures and have the goons get off my back. I would than have asked the officer to go talk to the parents and remind them that when they’re in public with their children, many people can be legally taking pictures of their children and if they have a problem with that they might find a more “family” oriented park to take their [overly protected] children.
As a pre-emptive strike, let me state for those who don’t know me, that my wife and I raised two sons living inside the city limits of Washington, DC, a place with a lot of strangers pointing cameras at you. We were all aware of that and - of course - my children were raised from their earliest moments to be wary while having a good time - street sense. Maybe they just don’t have it out here.
What a bunch of Nazi bastards. I would use a zoom lense in the future. I would suggest reading The Photographer’s Right ( http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm )
I strongly support your right to photograph in a public place. Yet the parents would have been understandably nervous had you been wearing the leather kilt and skull & crossbones shirt! (as in the photo on the web page) In similar situations I have demanded that a rent-a-cop call the police; that the police tell me which law I’m breaking. This approach will win you no friends, but I can’t help myself. I do try not to be rude and invasive about other people’s personal space. There’s always a chasm between what’s legally permissible and what’s polite.
Fear Fear Fear !!!!!
Look out ! The boogy man (MIGHT) be near.
This all reminds me of the salem witch trials. Look at his nose—-he’s a witch.
Remember the means of proving you were not a a witch? You had to DIE.
Look it up,salem witch trials of the 16 th century.