Why So Many Believe They Have the Right to Escape Public Photography

The debate surrounding the right to public photography and privacy has gained significant traction on the internet, leading many to believe that the right to avoid being photographed in public spaces is absolute. However, the reality is quite different. This article will explore the misunderstandings and misconceptions, dispelling these myths and explaining the nuances of public photography.

Common Misconceptions

One of the primary misconceptions is that simply because individuals have the right to request that someone not take their photograph, this equates to an unalienable right to never be photographed in public. The internet, in particular, is a breeding ground for misinformation, often fueled by niche communities such as the sovereign citizen movement in the United States. These groups believe things like 'not requiring a driver’s license,' which is patently false. It is crucial to understand that while you do have the right to refuse having your photo taken, the inverse is not necessarily true for everyone.

Legal and Ethical Considerations

It is important to consider the legal and ethical implications of public photography. In many countries, laws exist to govern what is allowed on government and private properties. These laws are the result of discussions and decisions made by elected officials and citizens alike. If you want to avoid being photographed, there is a systematic way to achieve this—by not appearing in public or by using reasonable measures to conceal your identity.

Public Photography and Privacy Rights

Many people think they have a blanket right to privacy that extends to being photographed in public. However, in Britain, as long as you do not break any other laws such as up-skirting or indecency, taking photos in public places is generally permissible. The perception that certain places are public may be blurred, as some areas like shopping malls, certain parks and gardens, and even some streets may not be considered true public spaces.

Street photography, a popular genre, often involves the photographer inadvertently capturing individuals in public. The practice of street photography is usually open, and photographers will often show their subjects the photos if asked. If a photograhp is deemed inappropriate, it can be deleted at the request of the subject. This highlights the gray areas in privacy rights, where ethical considerations must be balanced with public access to information.

Children in Public Photography

The subject of photographing children in public is particularly sensitive. The fear of pedophilia can lead to overzealous interpretation of privacy laws. However, there is no law against taking photos of children in public, again, provided no other laws are broken. The real issue lies in the preservation of dignity and respect for children's privacy, which is managed through social and ethical norms rather than strict legal restrictions.

SCOTUS Limits on Public Photography

It is essential to understand that the right to public photography is not entirely absolute. For instance, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has ruled on the existence of “time, place, and manner” restrictions on photography in certain contexts. This means that while you can generally take photos in public spaces, there are specific areas and times where photography is restricted. For example, taking photos in a courtroom or its adjacent hallways is prohibited to prevent witness intimidation and jury tampering. Similarly, using telephoto lenses or cameras with mirroring capabilities to peer into private spaces from public areas is also a no-no.

In conclusion, while you have the right to resist having your photograph taken, this doesn’t imply a universal right to be unseen in public. The reality is complex, involving legal, ethical, and social considerations. By understanding these nuances, we can navigate the landscape of public photography more thoughtfully and responsibly.