We’re Photographers, Not Terrorists
There are 4.3 million CCTV cameras spying on us here in the UK. That’s 20% of the worlds CCTV cameras, or to put it another way, 1 for every 14 residents. The average citizen is caught on camera 300 times a day.
Somehow we’ve allowed ourselves to be photographed more than any other country in the world. And yet, those of us who are photographers are harassed by building security guards and police officers at every opportunity.
Ask any photographer. We’re being made to feel that photography itself is a crime.
We’re told it’s to prevent terrorism, but as far as we know, photography has never been used in any terrorist attack. Ever.
Even if it had, do we seriously believe that terrorists would draw attention to themselves by using large and expensive SLR camera equipment, instead of something more inconspicuous such as a mobile phone?
Mobile phones are equipped with 8-10 megapixel cameras these days, and the images can be immediately emailed and deleted from the device. Wouldn’t that make more sense?
Besides, anybody can access detailed satellite photos and street level photography in almost any major city in the UK through Google Maps.
As for me personally, I’ve been questioned by the police for taking a photograph of my own house. I don’t live next to any buildings of great importance, just a suburban road full of houses in a small UK town. Furthermore, they cited prevention of terrorism, while interogating me.
This all-encompassing term, “prevention of terrorism”, has been used to justify some of the biggest encroachments on civil liberties in recent years. Every time you hear about terrorism on the news, you get just a little bit more scared. Fear in the population is good for governments. It eases the introduction of new laws such as America’s PATRIOT Act and the UK’s RIP Act.
Not a photographer? That changes nothing. This issue extends way beyond photographers rights into areas you do care about.
Drive a car? You should expect to be have your number plate photographed wherever you go. These cameras are currently used to track criminals, enforce congestion charging and monitor traffic flow. How long until this data can be accessed by private firms like insurance companies?
Maybe you’ve been on a plane recently? Then you already know what it’s like to be treated like a criminal. The endless searches, questions and pointless rules. Despite there only being 3 attempts in the last 8 years to commit acts of terrorism aboard commercial aircraft. The odds of being on on a plane involved in a terrorist incident during the past decade have been The Odds Of Airborne Terror accurately calculated to 1 in 10,408,947. For comparison, the odds of being struck by lightning are 1 in 576,000 which is around 20 times more likely.
A no-fly list which, at the time of 9/11 contained 16 names, now contains an estimated 1,000,000 names, and the cost of the program is approximately $1 billion to date. A huge number of false positives and abuses have been reported, many of which border on the ridiculous, and yet the whole thing can be easily defeated according to security expert Bruce Schneier.
Use a stolen credit card to buy a ticket under a fake name. Print a fake boarding pass with your real name on it and go to the airport. You give your real ID, and the fake boarding pass with your real name on it, to security. They’re checking the documents against each other. They’re not checking your name against the no-fly list that was done on the airline’s computers. Once you’re through security, you rip up the fake boarding pass, and use the real boarding pass that has the name from the stolen credit card. Then you board the plane, because theyíre not checking your name against your ID at boarding.
Oh and while I’m on the subject of airports, you’ve probably heard they’re introducing security cameras which can see through your clothes.
Further reading: Stop The Panic On Air Security.
If you use the internet, everything you do online is logged and accountable to you. Nothing to fear? Would you want your browsing or email history reviewed by someone, just to prove your innocence? Also remember that many wireless routers either default to being fully open, accessible by anyone, or can be easily hacked. It wasn’t you accessing that illegal-porn site? Prove it.
Maybe you carry a mobile phone. Cell phone locations (and thus, your movements) can be tracked by cell tower triangulation, and the details of each and every call and text message logged.
Database Abuse
The UK has a national DNA database that you can be added to for being drunk and disorderly, or taking part in an illegal demonstration. In fact, anyone who is arrested and detained at a police station, even if they are not subsequently charged with an offence, can be added to the database. The government wants to expand the scope of the database. Tony Blair said in 2006 that he could see no reason why the DNA of everyone should not ultimately be kept on record. In early 2007, five civil servants were arrested on charges of industrial espionage for allegedly stealing DNA information from the database and using it to establish a rival firm.
David Davis said it best during his resignation speech in 2008
“We will have shortly the most intrusive identity card system in the world. A CCTV camera for every 14 citizens, a DNA database bigger than any dictatorship has, with thousands of innocent children and a million innocent citizens on it. We’ve witnessed an assault on jury trials, that bulwark against bad law and its arbitrary abuse by the state, shortcuts for our justice system that make our justice system neither firm nor fair, and the creation of a database state, opening up our private lives to the prying eyes of official snoopers and exposing our personal data to careless civil servants and criminal hackers.
The state has security powers to clamp down on peaceful protests and so-called hate laws which stifle debate, while those who serve violence get off scot-free.”
As databases of personal information grow, it’s inevitable that data will be lost, stolen, sold or used for purposes other than it was intended. People also find ways around the system, such as vehicle license plate cloning, onion-router browsing, disposable mobile phones, the list goes on and on.
Exactly which airport security measure would have prevented the ability to assemble, mid-flight, a fake-bomb like the ones suspected to be used by 9/11 terrorists?
Back in 2008, I created a petition on the UK Prime Minister’s website, asking the Government to clarify it’s position regarding photography.
Through history, we have documented the world around us, whether through written word, art or photography.
Photography in particular has provided fantastic insights into the past and present, and is a hobby enjoyed by millions of people worldwide.
But today, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to take photos of our surroundings, particularly in cities like London.
In recent years, the price divide between professional and consumer equipment has blurred, and it’s quite common these days to see amateurs and hobbyists carrying around tripods, SLR cameras and a backpack full of equipment.
Yet, we are constantly harrassed by security guards and police officers in the name of preventing terrorism. They seem to be operating under a different interpretation of the law to the rest of us, believing that somehow the length of your lens, or size of your camera is relevant.
We would like clarification by the goverment on the law regarding photography of buildings and landmarks from public locations.
The petition received over 5000 signatures. The Government’s response?
There are no legal restrictions on photography in public places. However, the law applies to photographers as it does to anybody else in a public place. So there may be situations in which the taking of photographs may cause or lead to public order situations, inflame an already tense situation, or raise security considerations. Additionally, the police may require a person to move on in order to prevent a breach of the peace, to avoid a public order situation, or for the person’s own safety or welfare, or for the safety and welfare of others.
Each situation will be different and it would be an operational matter for the police officer concerned as to what action if any should be taken in respect of those taking photographs. Anybody with a concern about a specific incident should raise the matter with the Chief Constable of the relevant force.
In other words, no clarification at all. They’re saying “it’s up to the police”. Well that, unfortunately, is our problem. The petition was an attempt to draw attention to the fact that the police are stepping beyond their remit.
But, that was a year ago. Have things changed?
Despite some clarification by the Metropolitan Police, photographers are still being harassed in large numbers.
Today, photographers will be making a stand at Trafalgar Square for a mass gathering in defence of street photography.
Following a series of high profile detentions under s44 of the terrorism act including 7 armed police detaining an award winning architectural photographer in the City of London, the arrest of a press photographer covering campaigning santas at City Airport and the stop and search of a BBC photographer at St Pauls Cathedral and many others. PHNAT feels now is the time for a mass turnout of Photographers, professional and amateur to defend our rights and stop the abuse of the terror laws.
Andy, David and myself will be making the trip up there, and we’re hoping there will be many more.
If you can’t make it, you can follow the action on Twitter (#phnat / #mpg) and Flickr.
Update: Post Gathering Report
Well, it’s safe to say there were a few of us there. Everyone was really nice. There was no trouble at all, just lots of people making themselves heard by their presence.
As if trying to add weight to my earlier points, this absolute gift of a headline in the Guardian today on the very same day of the protests.
CCTV in the sky: police plan to use military-style spy drones
The opening quote tells you all you need to know:
Police in the UK are planning to use unmanned spy drones, controversially deployed in Afghanistan, for the “routine” monitoring of antisocial motorists, protestors, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers, in a significant expansion of covert state surveillance.
Also worth noting is that on the same day photographers try to make a point about not being terrorists and not being wanting to be treated with suspicion, the government raise the terror alert to “severe” to remind everyone else that we should always be afraid of terror, and should be even more vigilant than before.
A more suspicious mind might have called shenanigans on the timing of that announcement. I’m not going to go there, though. My tin foil hat is already showing.