- This topic is empty.
-
john, I’ll try to elaborate WSB’s position on this thing. And I as I do this, please understand that I’m speaking only for myself; I do not represent the official Blog position. Also note that, if anyone could be said to be “pushing the limit” of what’s appropriate on here, it’s me. So I shall try to proceed with . . . Ahem! . . . humility.
**************************************************************************************
¡Bueno!
There are at least three reasons why WSB has to be conservative when it comes to hosting photographs of private individuals. One has to do with the law, one with ethics, and one with business.
The legal reason is that, under the law, you cannot defame a private person. Yes, technically, if the individual is doing an illegal act in public, it is legal to post a photograph of that. However, it’s still tricky, because whether an act is illegal cannot be determined in the court of the public opinion; that can be determined only in a court of law. So legally speaking, a guy leaving dog poop on your lawn is considered to have done nothing wrong – absent a cop giving him a ticket and/or a judge levying a fine. In the meantime, if you post a recognizable photo of the guy on the Internet, and a bunch of people he knows see that – including maybe the guy’s neighbors, coworkers, etc. – then you have defamed him. The guy could then sue both you and the Blog. And in fact this happens all the time.
The ethical reason not to post incriminating pix follows closely from the legal one. Let’s suppose you snap a photo of a lady letting her poodle desecrate your lawn. Well, it turns out that the lady forgot her poop baggies that day, but as soon as she realizes it, she goes back and gets them. Then, while you’re in on your computer, she returns to pick up the poop. Is it right to post her picture and embarrass her along with the real scofflaws? Surely not. Often, there’s no way of knowing who’s really in the wrong, and so the right thing to do is err on the side of discretion, don’t you think?
Finally, there’s a business reason not to do “shaming,” which is that if WSB allows too much of that then users and advertisers will flee from the site.
Blog owners Tracy and Patrick are walking a fine line with the forum. On the one hand, it’s a good way to get people more involved, but there’s always the danger of having it turn people off, too.
***************************************************************************************
So that’s it in a nutshell, and Tracy may have more to add.
If you want help blurring the face on a photograph, I may be able to provide that. However, the safest policy is to criticize the behavior rather than the person. And remember that the real “targets” of the law are not necessarily those whom we catch “in the act” of breaking it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.