CCTV .. what's the problem with it ?

Forums › Off topic › CCTV .. what's the problem with it ?

Mark

1653 posts

Uber Geek

#101242 27-Apr-2012 14:03

I just read the following Herald article : http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10801843

And I can't see where the "outrage" and "shock" comes from with them installing cameras ?

Can someone who is more Policially Correctness savvy than me explain ?

floydbloke

3522 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#616045 27-Apr-2012 14:36

And I can't see where the "outrage" and "shock" comes from with them installing cameras ?

I'm with you. I'd actually find it quite re-assuring as a parent.

Did Eric Clapton really think she looked wonderful...or was it after the 15th outfit she tried on and he just wanted to get to the party and get a drink?

nickb800

2715 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#616062 27-Apr-2012 14:53

Sounds like the outrage might be more to do with the fact that parents/ex-staff arent happy with the explanation for getting the cameras, rather than the cameras themselves. I.e. outraged that they are being lied to (or think that they are), rather than outrage about privacy etc.

But yes, I agree with the OP, if it is purely about the cameras, then it seems a bit crazy

allan

2043 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#616063 27-Apr-2012 14:53

Well from reading between the lines, it would appear that a number of people believe that it was done by kindy management to spy on the staff, rather than being about children's safety. Who knows what the real reason is.

alienwithin

136 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#616835 29-Apr-2012 06:52

should be implemented at every state school. bullying then might not be such a problem when CCTV footage of it is handed over to the police, but then again youtube footage has been handed over a few times with little being done. Personally i see the footage of extra security for the parents. child goes missing the footage is there to show what happened, child injured, footage there to show what happens. Silly woman wants her 15 seconds of fame the news footage is there to show what happens.

Ragnor

8219 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#617064 29-Apr-2012 19:43

alienwithin: should be implemented at every state school. bullying then might not be such a problem when CCTV footage of it is handed over to the police, but then again youtube footage has been handed over a few times with little being done. Personally i see the footage of extra security for the parents. child goes missing the footage is there to show what happened, child injured, footage there to show what happens. Silly woman wants her 15 seconds of fame the news footage is there to show what happens.

CCTV footage doesn't prevent anything, at best it's a tool to look at what happened and only if you're lucky will it add any useful information.

I'm not strongly for or against camera's but parents should have been fully informed with sufficient notice, a few days notice is very poor.

I mean proper consultation is just basic courtesy!

Globolt

17 posts

Geek

#617095 29-Apr-2012 20:39

The woman in the story elaborated on tv about her issue, saying that she was scared that somebody could hack the cctv via the internet and watch her children. She also does not post photos of her children on facebook. I would rather have cctv. In london you are recorded over 300 times a day just walking to the tube and back.

Elpie

1304 posts

Uber Geek

#617172 29-Apr-2012 23:14

Globolt: The woman in the story elaborated on tv about her issue, saying that she was scared that somebody could hack the cctv via the internet and watch her children. She also does not post photos of her children on facebook. I would rather have cctv. In london you are recorded over 300 times a day just walking to the tube and back.

In many cities in NZ you are recorded potentially hundreds of times a day and most of us are unaware that cameras are on us most of the time in downtown areas. The argument in NZ was that installing them would reduce crime. It hasn't. Big Brother went in with little to no public consultation.

In the case of the kindergarten, parents should have been advised that it was being considered, and why, and should have been given an opportunity to express any concerns. At the very least, they should have a contract with the kindergarten stating who is monitoring, who will have access to the recordings, and how long the recordings are kept.

I wouldn't be happy with some unnamed security firm monitoring my children without me knowing who gets access to the footage or how long it's kept, or how it's destroyed. I would be even more unhappy if the broadcast is across online channels. Nor would I be happy about CCTV being installed without a proven reason. I'd wonder if the kindergarten was concerned about some staff behaviour (as in, potential molestation).

Access to footage isn't an unrealistic concern. Paedophiles have been known to hang around children so hacking in and watching isn't an unreasonable fear to have. Also, for those parents who have issues with the other parent, the idea that an ex may get access to the footage & monitor kids activities, comings and goings, time of attendance, etc could be a very real safety concern.

That's the problem with not consulting with parents - their questions can't be asked and concerns can't be addressed. No parent should have CCTV foisted on their kids without their agreement.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

josephhinvest

1543 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#617236 30-Apr-2012 09:12

Elpie:
Globolt: The woman in the story elaborated on tv about her issue, saying that she was scared that somebody could hack the cctv via the internet and watch her children. She also does not post photos of her children on facebook. I would rather have cctv. In london you are recorded over 300 times a day just walking to the tube and back.

In many cities in NZ you are recorded potentially hundreds of times a day and most of us are unaware that cameras are on us most of the time in downtown areas. The argument in NZ was that installing them would reduce crime. It hasn't. Big Brother went in with little to no public consultation.

In the case of the kindergarten, parents should have been advised that it was being considered, and why, and should have been given an opportunity to express any concerns. At the very least, they should have a contract with the kindergarten stating who is monitoring, who will have access to the recordings, and how long the recordings are kept.

I wouldn't be happy with some unnamed security firm monitoring my children without me knowing who gets access to the footage or how long it's kept, or how it's destroyed. I would be even more unhappy if the broadcast is across online channels. Nor would I be happy about CCTV being installed without a proven reason. I'd wonder if the kindergarten was concerned about some staff behaviour (as in, potential molestation).

Access to footage isn't an unrealistic concern. Paedophiles have been known to hang around children so hacking in and watching isn't an unreasonable fear to have. Also, for those parents who have issues with the other parent, the idea that an ex may get access to the footage & monitor kids activities, comings and goings, time of attendance, etc could be a very real safety concern.

That's the problem with not consulting with parents - their questions can't be asked and concerns can't be addressed. No parent should have CCTV foisted on their kids without their agreement.

Where's a +1 button when you need it?
Excellent summary of what is concerning about this situation.

Cheers,
Joseph