False accusation and public humiliation via "Shouting CCTV"
[Hat tip to Charlie Stross]
The Guardian reports that the flagship "Shouting CCTV" scheme in Middlesbrough is having to apologise for the false accusation and public humiliation of a young mother.
Ms Brewster said yesterday: "We were in the town centre and I'd got some chips at McDonald's for my daughter Ellie, but they were hot so I tipped them into a box and crumpled the packet up.""I put it on the bottom of Ellie's pram to take home but then heard this voice say: 'Please place the rubbish in the bin provided'."
She said she had no idea the incident had appeared on TV until her mother-in-law phoned.
How exactly did this incident end up on the local TV without the knowledge and permission of the victim ?
Presumably someone from the Council must have provided the video footage.
"I still think the cameras are a good idea, but I have to say when you haven't done anything wrong it's annoying to appear like this."
With the current media attention on the Middlesbrough scheme, the faceless bureaucrats and have spun a statement to the press that they intend to apologise for the incident i.e. that they have not yet done so.
Barry Coppinger, Middlesbrough's executive member for community safety, said: "I'm sorry if there has been a misunderstanding and I'll be writing to Ms Brewster to apologise."
So now the Council bureaucrats are going to hunt down her name and address to apologise for their mistake, and presumably add her name and address to their files under the category of "complainants".
What incentive is there for such petty officials to bother to apologise for their own Anti-Social Behaviour, once these schemes become more widespread, and the mainstream media's limited attention span has been exceeded ?
Comments
The accountability to the public of those operating CCTV in this kind of way is a key issue. "Shouting" CCTV operators remain hidden from the public, and it's well known that in situations where people believe themselves to be completely anonymous they're far more likely to indulge in bad behaviour because they know there will be no repercussions.
Overall, this whole idea is really a bad one, which criminalises people for very trivial acts and will breed a pervasive atmosphere of fear and suspicion reminiscent of life in the former soviet countries.
Posted by: Bob Mottram | April 13, 2007 10:04 AM
Has someone suggested to Ms Brewster that she complain to the Information Commissioner?
Posted by: Ian Brown | April 13, 2007 12:05 PM
If you’ve got nothing to hide why complain.
This mantra just seems to pervade all society presently. What this creates is fear of criticism of such schemes. It makes people subservient to surveillance for fear of suspicion. Suspicion of the belief that to fight against such intrusiveness implies criminality.
In George Orwells 1984 such inaction was the foundation of the totalitarian state.
Posted by: Andrew Evans | April 14, 2007 9:09 AM