A very interesting piece to spark debate regarding safety versus privacy.
WARNING: There are one or two minor instances of less than desirable language, mainly due to the state of annoyance of those being videoed.
I do not believe (though I’m not a legal expert) that the person filming did anything illegal, yet people clearly took offence at his actions. The point the cameraman is obviously trying to make is why then do people so willingly accept being recorded by surveillance cameras?
I think the main point this film misses, in my opinion, is that people do not understand the purpose or intent of the cameraman’s actions, and they then assume malfeasance, which then understandably provokes a negative response.
In contrast, for the most part, most people understand the intent and purpose of a surveillance camera in a public place (such as a store or train station): to protect public safety.
The main lesson to be learnt from this (in my opinion) is the importance of education and awareness, and ensuring your users / key stakeholders are aware of proceedings and bought into the concept from the outset.
Thoughts or comments?