The Ethical Quicksand of Filming People Without Their Consent

Videographers mustn’t violate the privacy and dignity of those at risk of their clips going viral on the internet

Siddharth Pai

is co-founder of Siana Capital, a venture fund manager.

I have long pursued the genre of street photography as an amateur photographer. Lately, though, I am increasingly uneasy about the ethics of taking people’s photographs in public places, especially if I intend to post my work online. Though my work does not extend to video, I feel that I must give up street photography.

Imagine walking down a busy street, minding your business, when suddenly you become a viral video star. Filming people without their consent, especially in public spaces, has become a pressing issue in the digital age. With smartphones constantly in hand, snapping photos or videos of strangers has become second nature to many, often with little regard for the individual’s right to privacy. But what happens when such content is posted online and goes viral? Is it ethical to film or photograph people without permission, especially when those images can live on the internet indefinitely?

A core issue with photographing or filming individuals without consent is the line between public and private spaces. Legally, people have a diminished expectation of privacy in public places, where they can be captured on camera as part of the environment. However, the ethical question remains: Should we film people just because we can?

In 2019, The Atlantic explored its ramifications for children, where parents often unknowingly broadcast their kids’ lives across social media platforms. In ’When Kids Realize Their Whole Life Is Already Online’, Taylor Lorenz emphasizes that today’s children face a world where their personal moments—innocuous or not—are shared publicly long before they can give consent. Well-meaning parents often post these images and videos, but the ethical issue lies in how these children grow up to find that their lives have been documented in detail online. Children express a sense of powerlessness, realizing that they have no control over the digital footprint their parents have given them. (shorturl.at/hYtPW)

Adults face a similar dilemma. A funny or embarrassing moment might be captured by a passerby and shared on platforms like TikTok or X, where the potential for virality far exceeds what Facebook, for instance, could achieve. They are optimized for content to go viral. TikTok, X and Instagram reels are particularly powerful because their algorithms favour quick, shareable content that can reach millions within hours. The focus now is on the ‘spreadability’ of content, often at the cost of privacy. A harmless clip of someone tripping over a step or dancing badly can turn into a meme, but what happens when it negatively impacts the subject’s personal or professional life?

TikTok and X videos can maximize emotional reactions, from humour to outrage. When the original video is taken down, or someone realizes their image was used without permission, the damage is often already done.

The social cost of virality is a growing concern. It raises questions about consent, dignity and ownership of one’s image. Just because someone can be filmed in public doesn’t mean they should be subject to the scrutiny or ridicule of millions of strangers. The ethical debate becomes even more significant for marginalized groups, who may face more severe consequences from unwanted viral fame.

France has taken legislative action in response to growing concerns about children’s digital privacy. As reported by Politico in February 2023, the French government passed laws designed to protect children from “oversharing” by their parents. The coinage “sharenting” refers to parents who post images or videos of their children online, sometimes exposing them to unintended risks, including exploitation. French lawmakers emphasized that parents must protect their children’s privacy, ensuring that both parents share responsibility for their children’s digital image rights. In extreme cases, parents can even lose their rights over their child’s image if it’s proven to harm the child’s dignity or moral integrity. (shorturl.at/Yhxdz)

This law is significant because it marks one of the first national efforts to curb non-consensual sharing of children’s images. But it’s not just about kids. The principles underlying this legislation—respect for privacy, consent and image rights—could apply to everyone. Why shouldn’t adults have the same protection from unauthorized public exposure? It’s worth noting that consent in the digital age goes beyond a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ It needs to be informed consent, with people fully aware of the consequences of what they’re agreeing to. It’s not enough to merely exist in a public space; individuals should retain control over their digital identity and how their likeness is used.

As society grapples with these new ethical challenges, some steps can be taken to balance the thrill of virality with respect for personal boundaries. Social media platforms can play a crucial role by implementing more robust reporting tools and enforcing stricter privacy controls. Individuals, too, must adopt a more ethical mindset, asking themselves whether capturing and sharing that ‘perfect moment’ is worth the potential harm it could cause.

Countries like France may have begun, but more needs to be done on a global scale. A universal digital consent law may seem like a distant dream, but the importance of clear ethical guidelines has grown as our lives get intertwined with online spaces. We must navigate these digital waters carefully, balancing freedom of expression with respect for privacy and dignity.

Note: This article first appeared in Mint (in print) and online at Livemint. For this and more, see:

https://www.dhirubhai.net/article/edit/7251913642433028096/

www.livemint.com