Children in pictures- your views

[Tyke Tiler]

Strange the amount of times you need to say that

'The amount of times'

(sharp intake of breath), it's gotta be knocking on to (drum roll please) all of a couple of times now that I responded to your posts.

Half of them, I've either disagreed with your manner or opinion and the other half I've offered positive feedback on your images and if you look through them, I have actually agreed with what your saying too.

I have no personal vendetta with you and that's the last time I'll say it.

I had somehting I wanted to say.. sorry if you dont like my views.. I thought they where valid given some of the input in this thread..

It seems that topic here is why children in photographs has become such a taboo and why is there the need to continuously nurture such taboo.

Some relate these issues or characteristics as a result of the media, I'd agree with this but I do not underestimate or dismiss the effect that political mechanics has.
Politicians have been practising scaremongering and fear tactics for some time now and since all the terrorism hype have realised that they get much better results in doing so.

We as a society are constantly persuaded to fear the worst or at least prepare for it.

Child abusers/sex offenders/murderers do exist but the real issue and from what I understand of the topic, is how does this relates to the ridiculous restrictions we seem to face, such as the prohibition of getting prints from a local printer of your kids playing in a paddling pool or not being able to photograph your kids at a school play, a soccer game or ballet recital and folk assuming that posting a pic of their loved ones will tempt nightmarish consequence.

The American 'Ill sue your ass' craze also has also had an effect.
My Mam has been a head teacher for 40 years and over the last 20 or so the amount of insane law suits that are filed against her school rise each year.

One parent filed one for a cut on her son's knee sustained whilst playing basketball.
No wonder, go home and flick on the tube and what do you see?

'Have you suffered an accident at work recently, have you been injured in an event that wasn't your fault? Call 0800 ILLSUEYOURASS because 'Injury Lawyers For' You operate on a no win no fee basis', Where's there's pain, there's a claim!

Most of these cases fall through but it takes considerable attention away from what schools are supposed to be doing - teaching.
Not to mention the stress factor that staff have to face from the parents who are fond of the idea.

The attitudes toward the protection of children is in my opinion out of control and judging by the responses in this thread, there's many who share the same feelings on the subject.

Hopefully you can see a little more why:

'The smart photographer understands the way of the world in this day and age.. adapts and moves forward.

doesn't quite hit the nail for me, hence why I suggest you seem to miss the point.

My apologies but there is no victimisation toward you.

T.

 

[KIPAX]

Move on and stop worrying about what I post.. I ahvent been nasty or offensive.. I just offered my point of view...

Move on fella

 

[Tyke Tiler]

Move on and stop worrying about what I post.. I ahvent been nasty or offensive.. I just offered my point of view...

Move on fella

Jeez, do you actually read anything?

 

[coldpenguin]

Is that on the basis that your in the same facebook network?

And valid for Mrs G's questions too.

No it was a machine which was not, and has never been, logged into facebook.
It used the same flaw that I mentioned before, facebook are not stopping people from accessing data, merely not showing them that the data is accessible.
Security wise, this is the lowest level, beaten only by not having any security.
From this data, I could extrapolate the sample to include all of the images in the album.

So, if I have 1 image from your facebook, I can find a lot of them.

The information I give from here, I hope not to upset anyone, but it is a possible scenario
If I were an undesirable, I would be searching randomly until I found 'something' that interested me. From that point, I would begin to extrapolate data to find more information/images of that person, including probably the ability to register as a friend. At this stage, an undesirable would probably then start to try and contact the individual and start to groom them.

I would hope that my techniques above would trigger an alarm on the systems should it be used multiple times. My concern is that it could probably be used a couple of times without that occurring (and no, I am not willing to test that theory, just in case, I have enough information already).

 

[Tyke Tiler]

Not it was a machine which was not, and has never been, logged into facebook.
It used the same flaw that I mentioned before, facebook are not stopping people from accessing data, merely not showing them that the data is accessible.
Security wise, this is the lowest level, beaten only by not having any security.

Well, y'learn something every day. Cheers for that

 

[coldpenguin]

Well, y'learn something every day. Cheers for that

I updated the post above, before your reply.

Unfortunately it is not such a great outcome. It should be concerning that a very widely used website, could have a flaw which allows it to be used in this way.

I suspect that you have heard on the news about 'sexting'. Many of this type of image turns up on facebook, in 'private' albums because these people do not believe that others can see them. This is the type of image which would probably inflame these 'individuals'

 

[Chillimonster]

My kids are all over the internet

In fact my entire 365 is devoted to them (go have a look see - its fun ), and i don't mind who sees them. As as been pointed out, what's the worst that could happen with a picture. The paranoid sensationalistic media is to blame in my opinion, closely followed by the government with all the silly legislations regarding CRB's and the new one ( i forget what its called...) A CRB is not worth the paper its written on as it doesn't show that someone is 'innocent', just that they have not been 'found guilty'.

I respect peoples opinions about the internet, even though i don't understand them, but in all honesty what's next, banning people from using their eyes in public places in case they catch a glimpse of a child (silly analogy i know, but you see the point i'm trying to make)

 

[Splog]

I respect peoples opinions about the internet, even though i don't understand them, but in all honesty what's next, banning people from using their eyes in public places in case they catch a glimpse of a child (silly analogy i know, but you see the point i'm trying to make)

Actually, it's not that silly! I went into a Toys-R-Us shop and was wandering through the area with all the young kids stuff and overheard one woman say to her mate " what's he in here for" (and no they didn't know me as I was about 100 miles away from home on a camping trip ) as I turned round to face them, one of the woman grabbed her childs hand and pulled her towards her sharply! The kid started squawking probably from the surprise of her mothers action

I was about to tell the mother what a stupid, ignorant idiot (plus a bit more) she was but the kid was obviously upset so thought better of it, I looked at her and gave the screwy Gesture i.e.

Some parents deserve to be locked up for over protectionism as imho they are not doing their kids any favours whatsoever! and then those same parents go on facebook or whatever and tell the world their woes, personal problems ..... WTF This country has a serious case of paranoia!

 

[coldpenguin]

The paranoid sensationalistic media is to blame in my opinion, closely followed by the government with all the silly legislations regarding CRB's and the new one ( i forget what its called...) A CRB is not worth the paper its written on as it doesn't show that someone is 'innocent', just that they have not been 'found guilty'.

I respect peoples opinions about the internet, even though i don't understand them, but in all honesty what's next

I think you are right here. People are being whipped up into a frenzy thinking that there is a pervert around every corner.
The CRB will not help a lot with much I think. If anything I reckon it is probably more to do with discouraging the individuals rather than tripping them up.

I am not trying to worry anyone with the information about facebook. It is just that sometimes people do not consider truly what they do on these sites. People rarely read terms and conditions. For example, there was a site (which is affiliated with facebook), aimed at pictures of people, where the terms and conditions of the site state that by using the service, you give them the right in perpetuity to reproduce the images in any form, for any purpose, and linked with any other photos.

Facebook and the site above have to give the impression that their sites are secure, otherwise they would not get customers. However, I think that there are some people who put too much trust in what is being displayed to them, without considering what it possible. The facebook wording I believe is, 'Only display album to friends', this relates to the page of information displaying the pictures, not the pictures themselves. It is a form of lying by omission.

 

[tiler65]

Piccy of my daughter

No worries from me posting

Life is too short and there will always be one who is different.

Threads like this breed paranoia.

 

[Tyke Tiler]

Threads like this breed paranoia.

Great shot there mate!

I wouldn't say thread like this breed paranoia, the majority seem to recognise that there is an issue with paranoia if anything.

 

[Steve Smith]

what's next, banning people from using their eyes in public places in case they catch a glimpse of a child (silly analogy i know, but you see the point i'm trying to make)

The Daily Mail printed a picture of a known paedophile a couple of months ago. The accompanying text pointed out that he was in a shopping centre and was able to look at children!


Steve.

 

[Marcel]

And therein lies the heart of the problem. The media.

In order of guilt : Print, TV, Radio.

I don't think it's the government's fault that there is a massive state of paranoia surrounding paedophiles, it's the media.
Theyre the ones who print the sensationalist crap in order to sell a few more copies. No longer do they care about what actually goes in, just what they can get away with to sell more. There's no integrity, no morality, just pure financial greed.

And it goes unchecked. We needed regulation of it a long long time ago.

 

[ladysue]

Piccy of my daughter

No worries from me posting

Life is too short and there will always be one who is different.

Threads like this breed paranoia.

Thats a lovely picture of your little girl. I dont think that this thread is breeding paranoia. I was just interested to see if I was alone, being restricted in where I post my grandchildrens photos.It is interesting seeing other peoples views.

I see there was a short article in the Mail yesterday on the subject of taking photos of kids.

 

[whiteflyer]

I believe most of the paranoia is media feed, there has been NO rise or fall in the number of child abuse cases in the last 50 years (according to a senior police officer recently on TV) and I know living only 20 or so miles from the moors murders of the 1960s, my parents did not worry about me playing out as a child.

I take photos of under 17 athletics and put them on my website for sale. I have, as other do, a line in my website saying if you wish a photo to be remove contact me and I will do so within 24 hrs.


3370 children's photos on the site

zero, none, nil, nada, complaints



The only good thing I can see out of all the paranoia is that parents will stop shoving pics of their newly born little baby in my face and saying how cute they are.

 

[gumbo-67]

Piccy of my daughter

No worries from me posting

Life is too short and there will always be one who is different.

Threads like this breed paranoia.

and a lovley picture of a pretty little girl..thank you for showing us

 

[Tyke Tiler]

And therein lies the heart of the problem. The media.

In order of guilt : Print, TV, Radio.

I don't think it's the government's fault that there is a massive state of paranoia surrounding paedophiles, it's the media.
Theyre the ones who print the sensationalist crap in order to sell a few more copies. No longer do they care about what actually goes in, just what they can get away with to sell more. There's no integrity, no morality, just pure financial greed.

Very well said Bod.

And it goes unchecked. We needed regulation of it a long long time ago.

Regulation of immoral financial practice amongst strict policing of British banks would be a relief.
But IMO it's endorsed as opposed to unchecked.
I can't see immoral financial gain and public paranoia ever being extinguished by politicians and there campaigns. It's encouraged, provoked and emphasised.

 

[DiddyDave]

Jumping aboard a little late - I have to agree totally with CJ's post

I've never been asked to not post online any kids' photos & certainly never to take them down

I did have one where I couldn't, but that was as the kid was under a protection order and I had to shoot her supervised by some social workers - this was something to do with parental issues and nothing to do with pervs potentially viewing them

I got my CRB a few years ago to placate Toddler Groups & parents - just in case - and guess what... no-one has EVER asked. I even had a couple in last year where one was a cop & the other a social worker, not only did they not ask but I actually asked them if they wanted to see a copy and they couldn't have been less interested

I have had personal experience of pervs when I was a child and that was from two teachers, one of whom was arrested and did time - so perhaps we should lock teachers up just in case, or at least treat them with a tremendous amount of suspicion as they actually want to deal with kids - so why if not all potential pervs???

DD