Filming public meetings

[danbrotherston]

Apparently there was a big kerfuffle in London this week as a city councillor at a public meeting asked an amateur/youtube reporter/journalist to stop filming a public meeting, and moved their personal camera equipment without consent, and asked them to leave.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVLaLGWCXDk⁩

[bravado]

The Cambridge council meetings just announced a mandatory bag check policy + new security guards, so that’s all a bunch of good signs…

Edit: Reading more about this guy with the camera... he seems like a bit of a dingus looking for Youtube views.

[ijmorlan]

I’m not surprised to learn that it is not considered proper to film a council meeting. It’s not entirely unlike a court proceeding.

There seems to be a contingent of people who think that it is always legal to film in spaces generally accessible to the public, but that is not by any means universally true, although obviously the exact rules depend on the several overlapping jurisdictions effective in any given time and place.

[danbrotherston]

I’m not surprised to learn that it is not considered proper to film a council meeting. It’s not entirely unlike a court proceeding.

There seems to be a contingent of people who think that it is always legal to film in spaces generally accessible to the public, but that is not by any means universally true, although obviously the exact rules depend on the several overlapping jurisdictions effective in any given time and place.

Well, you're wrong lol. It is in fact entirely legal and allowed to film the public meetings of the government. This was confirmed by the head of security (in a later video by the same creator) who indicated that the councillor acted improperly here both by having a confrontation with the creator (it isn't her job and she shouldn't have moved his equipment) but also by objecting to the filming in the first place.

It is not wrong to assume that filming is allowed. It is allowed (as all things in our society are) by default unless there are explicit rules against it. At a meeting open to the public, you can assume that it will be allowed, unless it is explicitly disallowed and that disallowal can also be challenged (not at the meeting obviously) because there must be a compelling reason to disallow it as it is in the public interest to have journalists (and anyone can be a journalist) recording public proceedings.

Also, this wasn't a council meeting this was a public consultation.

[danbrotherston]

The Cambridge council meetings just announced a mandatory bag check policy + new security guards, so that’s all a bunch of good signs…

Edit: Reading more about this guy with the camera... he seems like a bit of a dingus looking for Youtube views.

Reading where? He's a youtube creator like any other, and he's clearly pushing an agenda (pro-urbanism--he doesn't pretend to be a neutral voice). But I don't see how that makes him a dingus or "looking for views" any more than any other youtube creator.

Certainly you'll find plenty written about him otherwise but that's the same kind of slander anyone with an unpopular opinion will receive regardless of their actual behaviour.

FWIW...I've only seen some of his videos, and his podcast..I don't think he's all that compelling a creator, but I haven't seen his behaviour in those contexts vary significantly from other creators.

[ijmorlan]

I’m not surprised to learn that it is not considered proper to film a council meeting. It’s not entirely unlike a court proceeding.

There seems to be a contingent of people who think that it is always legal to film in spaces generally accessible to the public, but that is not by any means universally true, although obviously the exact rules depend on the several overlapping jurisdictions effective in any given time and place.

Well, you're wrong lol. It is in fact entirely legal and allowed to film the public meetings of the government. This was confirmed by the head of security (in a later video by the same creator) who indicated that the councillor acted improperly here both by having a confrontation with the creator (it isn't her job and she shouldn't have moved his equipment) but also by objecting to the filming in the first place.

It is not wrong to assume that filming is allowed. It is allowed (as all things in our society are) by default unless there are explicit rules against it. At a meeting open to the public, you can assume that it will be allowed, unless it is explicitly disallowed and that disallowal can also be challenged (not at the meeting obviously) because there must be a compelling reason to disallow it as it is in the public interest to have journalists (and anyone can be a journalist) recording public proceedings.

Also, this wasn't a council meeting this was a public consultation.

It would be more correct to say that I learned incorrectly, so thanks for the correction. And it is still true that there are many places where one may enter where one is not free to record, and there are lots of people who think they actually can record wherever they want.

It sounds to me like the real lesson is that anybody in authority should know the laws that apply to their situation before telling somebody to stop recording. And they definitely shouldn’t pass rules (or bylaws) about the issue unless they understand the higher rules coming from, in our case, the federal and provincial governments. It sounds from what you’re saying that in this case it was just one councillor who didn’t understand the applicable rules.

[danbrotherston]

Well, you're wrong lol. It is in fact entirely legal and allowed to film the public meetings of the government. This was confirmed by the head of security (in a later video by the same creator) who indicated that the councillor acted improperly here both by having a confrontation with the creator (it isn't her job and she shouldn't have moved his equipment) but also by objecting to the filming in the first place.

It is not wrong to assume that filming is allowed. It is allowed (as all things in our society are) by default unless there are explicit rules against it. At a meeting open to the public, you can assume that it will be allowed, unless it is explicitly disallowed and that disallowal can also be challenged (not at the meeting obviously) because there must be a compelling reason to disallow it as it is in the public interest to have journalists (and anyone can be a journalist) recording public proceedings.

Also, this wasn't a council meeting this was a public consultation.

It would be more correct to say that I learned incorrectly, so thanks for the correction. And it is still true that there are many places where one may enter where one is not free to record, and there are lots of people who think they actually can record wherever they want.

It sounds to me like the real lesson is that anybody in authority should know the laws that apply to their situation before telling somebody to stop recording. And they definitely shouldn’t pass rules (or bylaws) about the issue unless they understand the higher rules coming from, in our case, the federal and provincial governments. It sounds from what you’re saying that in this case it was just one councillor who didn’t understand the applicable rules.

I think a lot of the confusion comes around private places that are open to the public. Malls, stores, theme parks, condominiums, etc. We've ceded so much of our public space to private corporations that it's becoming problematic that the normal rules that apply in public don't always apply in a private space just because that private space is open to the public.

But yeah, this case, this councillor clearly overstepped her authority (and also didn't follow proper process). I don't follow London politics, but I asked my parents about it and they said this is not the first time this councillor has had controversy.

[ac3r]

Auditors lol...always funny. I am totally on their side when it comes to telling authority or government to piss off but this approach is just weird. The second she touched the camera he should have shouted out to her from his seat or at least been closer to it to say it more subtly. If she refused, then simply tell her to piss off! Who the fuck cares? Tell them off, continue on what you're doing and ignore them.