The tweet from @_defcon_ back in October about 7,000 DC21 pictures having been posted to Facebook motivated me to make this post. The tweet is here: https://twitter.com/_defcon_/status/393165586185723904
In the good old days, most attendees and goons knew and understood the photo policy, which was roughly "explicit permission to photograph someone is required, no pictures of large groups at all". This was generally enforced, by the community (politely or with photobombing) and/or the goons, as required.
Over the years, this policy seems to have gone by the wayside, even though it is still clearly shown in the Video/Photography Rules listed on the Press page (go find it yourself on the press page for last year's con: https://www.defcon.org/html/defcon-21/dc-21-press.html ). I shall paste it here as well:
While attending DC21 last year, I encountered a film crew in a hallway doing an interview, where they were including as background all the folks passing by in the hallway, including their faces, clearly visible. This is pretty clearly prohibited behavior, so I mentioned it to a security goon nearby, asking if the photo policy was still being enforced. His reply was something like "I wish I knew; we can't get a clear answer on it" and he suggested that I would be welcome to enforce it myself, which I did. The film crew was rather annoyed, as you might imagine.
Also, if you look through the ~7,000 pictures posted on Facebook (and wherever else they are officially or semi-officially posted), there are many clear violations of the policy in there. Crowd shots, hallway shots, people having conversations in the mid-distance who were clearly not aware they were being photographed, etc. Of course, I don't know for sure that the photographer didn't go interrupt their conversation after taking the picture to get permission, but that seems extremely unlikely.
So, we have a situation where there is still an official policy published on the Press page, but it is not well communicated to attendees (no signs posted near registration, etc.) or to security goons (at least in my one personal example). And we have clear violations of the policy published on offical or semi-offical channels. This sends the message that it's OK with leadership if folks just ignore their published policy. It also reminds me of the way many organizations treat their infosec policies, which saddens me, since this is the type of thing many of us fight in our professional lives.
I understand that it's hard to enforce, cameras are always more ubiquitous, it's hard to remain truly anonymous/private while attending a huge con in Vegas, blah blah. But just because something is imperfect doesn't mean we should disregard it or just stop enforcing it. And currently, it's not even an enforcement problem -- the message that I think most folks get (if they bother to get one at all) is that nobody really cares, so do whatever you want.
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I think that polite people should generally follow a similar photo policy in *any* public place. I don't go around taking pictures of people without their permission, and I'm careful to keep recognizable faces out of broader shots as much as possible. Shouldn't we make some effort to set our own community standard here, especially while at the con? Shouldn't we *at least* communicate, socialize and follow our existing published policy?
If we are really at the point where this policy is to be abandoned, then the Press page should be updated with whatever the policy actually is, so our published rules aren't at odds with what we actually do.
Thanks for making it this far. I hope that this thread gets some discussion.
- hinge
In the good old days, most attendees and goons knew and understood the photo policy, which was roughly "explicit permission to photograph someone is required, no pictures of large groups at all". This was generally enforced, by the community (politely or with photobombing) and/or the goons, as required.
Over the years, this policy seems to have gone by the wayside, even though it is still clearly shown in the Video/Photography Rules listed on the Press page (go find it yourself on the press page for last year's con: https://www.defcon.org/html/defcon-21/dc-21-press.html ). I shall paste it here as well:
Hackers tend to be passionate about personal privacy, and we have always respected that - we ask (/demand) that you do the same. Don't feel singled out - we have the same video and photography rules for the press as we do our attendees.
Photography/video without explicit permission is forbidden.
"Crowd Shots" are disallowed unless the crowd knows it's going to be captured (and has a chance to face away). Don't try to capture large crowd shots unless a Press Goon is present (that's what we call our staff; Goons, yes, seriously).
If you've accidentally taken a picture without permission, delete it. If you are asked by an attendee to delete a picture they did not give you permission to take, do so immediately.
Failure to abide by these rules may result in the revocation of your press pass and ejection from the property.
Finally, don't even *think* of having a hidden camera (google "Michelle Madigan" to see what happened when this was last attempted).
Photography/video without explicit permission is forbidden.
"Crowd Shots" are disallowed unless the crowd knows it's going to be captured (and has a chance to face away). Don't try to capture large crowd shots unless a Press Goon is present (that's what we call our staff; Goons, yes, seriously).
If you've accidentally taken a picture without permission, delete it. If you are asked by an attendee to delete a picture they did not give you permission to take, do so immediately.
Failure to abide by these rules may result in the revocation of your press pass and ejection from the property.
Finally, don't even *think* of having a hidden camera (google "Michelle Madigan" to see what happened when this was last attempted).
Also, if you look through the ~7,000 pictures posted on Facebook (and wherever else they are officially or semi-officially posted), there are many clear violations of the policy in there. Crowd shots, hallway shots, people having conversations in the mid-distance who were clearly not aware they were being photographed, etc. Of course, I don't know for sure that the photographer didn't go interrupt their conversation after taking the picture to get permission, but that seems extremely unlikely.
So, we have a situation where there is still an official policy published on the Press page, but it is not well communicated to attendees (no signs posted near registration, etc.) or to security goons (at least in my one personal example). And we have clear violations of the policy published on offical or semi-offical channels. This sends the message that it's OK with leadership if folks just ignore their published policy. It also reminds me of the way many organizations treat their infosec policies, which saddens me, since this is the type of thing many of us fight in our professional lives.
I understand that it's hard to enforce, cameras are always more ubiquitous, it's hard to remain truly anonymous/private while attending a huge con in Vegas, blah blah. But just because something is imperfect doesn't mean we should disregard it or just stop enforcing it. And currently, it's not even an enforcement problem -- the message that I think most folks get (if they bother to get one at all) is that nobody really cares, so do whatever you want.
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I think that polite people should generally follow a similar photo policy in *any* public place. I don't go around taking pictures of people without their permission, and I'm careful to keep recognizable faces out of broader shots as much as possible. Shouldn't we make some effort to set our own community standard here, especially while at the con? Shouldn't we *at least* communicate, socialize and follow our existing published policy?
If we are really at the point where this policy is to be abandoned, then the Press page should be updated with whatever the policy actually is, so our published rules aren't at odds with what we actually do.
Thanks for making it this far. I hope that this thread gets some discussion.
- hinge
Comment