PC gone mad when you cannot even take pictures of your own kids!!

WestonDave

I'm afraid I do see this as sensitivity gone mad. Fortunately our kids school have never made an issue of this - we have been in performances involving (over the course of the afternoon) 600 kids from the school with the only comment on using cameras being to please avoid using the flash as it might be distracting!

I simply can't see that the reduction in risk to the relevant kids is significant enough to make it worth preventing everyone else from doing normal things and enjoying memories of their kids upbringing. I know some will say that no risk is worth taking, but the reality is that risk cannot be entirely eliminated (without keeping the relevant kids under 24 house arrest!) and if the already small risk is not being reduced by much due to these restrictions, the only reasonable conclusion is that its not reasonable to restrict 99% of the population for an insignificant benefit for a very small minority.

If the "offender" doesn't know where the kids are, and reasonable precautions have been taken to hide them - i.e. moved out of the circles of contact that "he" would be likely to know, then the chances of a once a term/year school peformance resulting in a photo of the at risk child getting posted in such a way that "he" gets to see it are heading for lottery winning proportions!

Any

blue_monkey wrote: »

To clear something up because the argument that is ensuing does not apply in THIS case - there were NO issues of any child personal safety or otherwise. Which is why we were asked if our children could be photographed and why their photo's have been plastered over several local newspapers last week (and more due for this week), facebook and the choir website.

I can totally understand for SOME there may be this issue, in THIS case there were none of these issues so they are irrelvent, let's not argue about something that does not apply IN THIS CASE. Save them for another time, that argument does not apply.

The person who had a go at me had no reason to do so as I had already done as I had been asked 75 minutes previously and I had not got my camera out of my bag since. She could have chosen the time when they audatorium was empty and most people had gone to the loo/bar but she chose when it was busy and she simply went out of her way to humiliate me in front of as many people as possible for taking a picture of MY child. When I questioned why she shouted at me some more. My husband did say she was not having my camera (which was in my bag anyway!!)

And her reasons for not taking the picture were nonsense - wants more this was not enough for them, they knew I was a parent and then went out of their way to try and brand me as some kind of pa edo to the choir leaders. They could have said 'the parents are taking pictures, did you know' but instead they said 'someone is trying to take photos of the children'. They phrased it that way for a reason and that was to make me look out to be something I was not.

I personally think she was completely and utterly out of line, if there was such an issue to justify such a hysteric fit in public, everyone should have been notified about it (no pictures) in advance. Even at the beginning of the show. She was just a busy body who was trying to make herself look important.

I would definitely complain. There could be issues, that is besides the point, it's how you deal with it!!

sooty&sweep

Hi

Write a letter to the venue explaining that you had been advised by your daughter's group that you could take photo's etc etc and hence why you felt the behaviour of the venue's staff was totally inappropriate etc etc and you would like to know what they're going to do to ensure such miscommunication doesn't happen again and a written apology for the humiliation of being spoken to in such a manner in public.

Send a copy of the above letter to the choir group so that they are aware and they can alter procedures in future to ensure no more misunderstandings.

There will be people who don't want their children's picture being taken for a whole host of reasons but if their child takes part in such a public display they have to expect photos to be taken. From what you say the choir group had already asked for permission and so parents that were effected would know it was happening and could take appropriate precautions in advance.

Jen

suki1001

Our school had a no photo policy one year and I didn't get any photos of my son's first nativity, I had to work, as a mum I was really upset. There was no specific reason, just parents signing the no pics form. The next year the deputy head said "take all the photo's you like "! Same children, no one had left. I really don't think it is always down to child protection that photos aren't allowed. This country did go through a bit of !!!!!phile paranoia phase a couple of years ago.

Violetta_2

I think some venues & events ban people taking photo's so they can take their own & charge ridiculous prices for folks to buy them. I think the advice given to contact the venue direcly & ask them to clarify why this person said photos were banned when you had been told it was ok, also explain how you were spoken to/shouted at, as that's way out of order.

Ames

I don't think this has anything to do with taking photos of kids, but taking photos of the band. If they're well known then they will have everything legally tied up so that they have rights over photos and recordings, so that they can sell them on. I think the 'children' thing is just an excuse to stop parents asking how much the group got paid for handing over all those disclosure forms.

Expect to see publicity about how great the band are working with kids in the papers/mags soon...

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Maybe the shouting woman knew that there actually was an adult there with a strong need to not be in your snapshots, but was backstage with the children and absolutely terrified that you had already got a photo of her?


Women get tracked down and assaulted/murdered by exes far too often.

Saying it was for an adult would make it too obvious, after all.

Ich_2

If it is in a private venue they have the right to set whatever rules they wish regarding photography/recordings/video. The reasons stated are ridiculous as was the method. Basically, their property, their rules.
However if it was a public place you have the absolute right to record/photograph/video what you wish.

WestonDave

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Maybe the shouting woman knew that there actually was an adult there with a strong need to not be in your snapshots, but was backstage with the children and absolutely terrified that you had already got a photo of her?


Women get tracked down and assaulted/murdered by exes far too often.

Saying it was for an adult would make it too obvious, after all.

Then arguably that adult shouldn't be in a position to be seen by a large audience (whether taking photos or not). The risk of them being identified by a photo being passed on is not significantly bigger than a parent of the kids there inviting or giving a ticket to someone that could identify them during the performance.

I fully understand that there is a risk, but I'm far from being convinced that the precautions being taken and the consequent inconvenience to normal parents is justified by a reasonable benefit to those at risk. How far does this go - do we ban the BBC from doing outside news broadcasts showing people walking in the background just in case someone shown in the footage is at risk? No clearly we don't and yet that footage is far more likely to be seen by someone able to identify them (by sheer weight of viewing numbers) than the chance that a photo is taken by someone that knows someone that knows someone else that passes it on to the offender.

*Louise*

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Maybe the shouting woman knew that there actually was an adult there with a strong need to not be in your snapshots, but was backstage with the children and absolutely terrified that you had already got a photo of her?


Women get tracked down and assaulted/murdered by exes far too often.

Saying it was for an adult would make it too obvious, after all.

There is really no excuse for bad manners, shouting in front of everyone is a ridiculous way to behave.

And especially 75mins after someone had already had a word and the OP had complied? Sounds like she just wanted to make herself look important imo