Michael McIntyre Police Helicopter photo

jonbeeza

jonbeeza

Suspended / Banned
Messages
9,388
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
Police take photo of Michael McIntyre in their Police helicopter, then tweet it, a bit naughty. Or do you think it OK ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33535578

Tried to post this on talk photo forum, but it would not post there! Hope it's not been posted already, did a search but nothing came up.
 
Last edited:
Non story. Every single day we are recorded on video by the multitude of CCTV cameras around our cities and in shops.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
Non story. Every single day we are recorded on video by the multitude of CCTV cameras around our cities and in shops.
Click to expand...
Ahh but it is a story, it's in the papers ;)

Plus the point here is, the photo was tweeted by Police. It was done for fun. But there again that's what we do, we take photos of the Police and Post them for fun :)
 
Last edited:
jonbeeza said:
Police take photo of Michael McIntyre in their Police helicopter, then tweet it, a bit naughty. Or do you think it OK ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33535578

Tried to post this on talk photo forum, but it would not post there! Hope it's not been posted already, did a search but nothing came up.
Click to expand...

An intrusion. I'd like to see a ban on all intrusive arial photography.

When I lived in Suffolk we were plagued with people taking shots of our house and then trying to flog us prints on the doorstep.

I can understand the need for mapping purposes, but that doesn't need to be so low.
 
Taking it, fine but tweeting it is a bit naughty. As is describing him as "funny". IMO!
 
JennyGW said:
An intrusion. I'd like to see a ban on all intrusive arial photography.

When I lived in Suffolk we were plagued with people taking shots of our house and then trying to flog us prints on the doorstep.

I can understand the need for mapping purposes, but that doesn't need to be so low.
Click to expand...

Why do you want just aerial photography banned. Surely the use of zoom lenses can be equally intrusive? And why aren't you campaigning to have the previously mentioned CCTV banned? Isn't that an intrusion?
 
You'll find a lot of private cctv's have the ability to put blanks over areas, such as neighbours house windows.
 
JennyGW said:
An intrusion. I'd like to see a ban on all intrusive arial photography.

When I lived in Suffolk we were plagued with people taking shots of our house and then trying to flog us prints on the doorstep.

I can understand the need for mapping purposes, but that doesn't need to be so low.
Click to expand...
A company tried to sell us a print of an aerial photo some years ago, my then girlfriend was actually in the photo lounging in the garden. They probably thought that was a selling point, annoyed the girlfriend it did.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
Why do you want just aerial photography banned. Surely the use of zoom lenses can be equally intrusive? And why aren't you campaigning to have the previously mentioned CCTV banned? Isn't that an intrusion?
Click to expand...

The OP is talking about a helicopter. Generally they are in the air when taking photos.

Now that you have brought up the intrusive use of zoom lenses, I can inform you that I feel this should be banned, too.

As for CCTV, if it is pointing into other peoples' private property, ban that, too!

And let's not forget camera phones on sticks over peoples' fences! Ban 'em all!
 
The police have a camera in the helicopter for a reason, that reason is for crime prevention and other lawful purposes. The Police in this instance, used it for personal use. Or was it on the Police twitter site?
 
Taking it, fine. As per previous comment, our images are recorded numerous times on a daily basis.
Tweeting it? Definitely on questionable ground there as no earthly reason to be posting it on social media.
 
JennyGW said:
The OP is talking about a helicopter. Generally they are in the air when taking photos.

Now that you have brought up the intrusive use of zoom lenses, I can inform you that I feel this should be banned, too.

As for CCTV, if it is pointing into other peoples' private property, ban that, too!

And let's not forget camera phones on sticks over peoples' fences! Ban 'em all!
Click to expand...

Already covered under Harrassment law isn't it?
 
viv1969 said:
Taking it, fine. As per previous comment, our images are recorded numerous times on a daily basis.
Tweeting it? Definitely on questionable ground there as no earthly reason to be posting it on social media.
Click to expand...

But it's social media. Lets be honest there's no need for about 99.99% of stuff (including images) posted on social media but people still do it. At the end of the day this will be a media position, given to a social media savy person (read young university leaver) who doesn't understand the limitations, having already that day probably tweeted a picture of their breakfast, their journey to work, the weather, the funny bloke opposite, the contents of the waste bin.....
 
Byker28i said:
But it's social media. Lets be honest there's no need for about 99.99% of stuff (including images) posted on social media but people still do it. At the end of the day this will be a media position, given to a social media savy person (read young university leaver) who doesn't understand the limitations, having already that day probably tweeted a picture of their breakfast, their journey to work, the weather, the funny bloke opposite, the contents of the waste bin.....
Click to expand...

If it were the social media account of an individual I'd agree.
But it's not.
 
It seems it was posted on the Police own Twitter page, in some ways that could seem worse. The photo must have been removed, could not find it on there..
 
But it's people who tweet this stuff, constantly, always, and people have jobs to do this, so being people (or a person, probably young) mistakes get made. Yes it was an invasion of privacy and as such was taken down as soon as it was noticed\mentioned to them.

Which law do you think they have broken? Can't be under harassment as it's not continuous or persistant.

Human rights act article 8? Naomi Cambell once sued the newspapers using this as a right to privacy, but that wasn't a one off occasion.
 
Last edited:
Byker28i said:
But it's people who tweet this stuff, constantly, always, and people have jobs to do this, so being people (or a person, probably young) mistakes get made. Yes it was an invasion of privacy and as such was taken down as soon as it was noticed\mentioned to them.

Which law do you think they have broken? Can't be under harassment as it's not continuous or persistant.

Human rights act article 8? Naomi Cambell once sued the newspapers using this as a right to privacy, but that wasn't a one off occasion.
Click to expand...

I haven't said any law has been broken.
 
It was on radio 4 this morning, including an interview with the guy who regulates these things - he said that he immediately took it up with the police, they immediately took down their tweet. He said that they were way out of order posting it. He also said that the photo came from a police drone, not a chopper.

Personally I have absolutely no problem with the "intrusion" element - the police can watch me, photograph me all they want, and so can the security services, on the basis that I have nothing to hide and on the fact that this kind of activity is protecting us both from terrorists and other criminals.
My problem is with the mis-use of the data that they collect, and with the fact that there are no effecive controls on the people who come into possession of this data.
 
viv1969 said:
I haven't said any law has been broken.
Click to expand...
I didn't say you had, was wondering if you thought any had as I wasn't sure if there were any that were relevant, just as an interesting point on taking images in a public place.
 
andyscott said:
Why the eff to police want to tweet? To think its cool?
Click to expand...

To share information. It's been proven as a quick method of disseminating information on a rapid basis, such as stolen vehicles, missing persons etc. City of London tweeted last year? about the tower hamlets march, location, traffic issues. Very handy as we were trying to get to Canary Wharfe.
 
Garry Edwards said:
It was on radio 4 this morning, including an interview with the guy who regulates these things - he said that he immediately took it up with the police, they immediately took down their tweet. He said that they were way out of order posting it. He also said that the photo came from a police drone, not a chopper.
Click to expand...

I missed this Gary. Why were they out of order, morally or broken a law?
 
The stupidity of the police grows with every passing breath. Now they've adopted the Twittersphere's obsession with celebrities doing nothing of note.
 
Byker28i said:
I didn't say you had, was wondering if you thought any had as I wasn't sure if there were any that were relevant, just as an interesting point on taking images in a public place.
Click to expand...

I don't think so no.
It just seems "off" to me that they posted it at all.
There's no reason for them to do so except in "look what we did" kind of fashion.

Paps and pillocks post all manner of tripe on their banal t***ter feeds a faceberk pages....I suppose I just didn't expect the police to be equally as juvenile.
 
'Police' as in part of the police force but the civil staff part.

Interesting case though as I'm thinking of doing my thesis on photographing children in public, possibly.
 
Byker28i said:
'Police' as in part of the police force but the civil staff part.

Interesting case though as I'm thinking of doing my thesis on photographing children in public, possibly.
Click to expand...

Police as in NPAS London, the official Twitter account of the National Police Air Support Unit, who act in an official capacity for that force, and not an affiliate shooter for "Heat" magazine. (Other trash mags are available...some described as newspapers).
 
viv1969 said:
Police as in NPAS London, the official Twitter account of the National Police Air Support Unit, who act in an official capacity for that force, and not an affiliate shooter for "Heat" magazine. (Other trash mags are available...some described as newspapers).
Click to expand...


Well, that's one part of the press still employing photographers :D
 
KIPAX said:
someone takes picture of well known comedian and puts on twitter... whats the problem? talk about mountains out of molehills
Click to expand...
Exactly, all perfectly harmless.
 
KIPAX said:
someone takes picture of well known comedian and puts on twitter... whats the problem? talk about mountains out of molehills
Click to expand...
Or, to spin it the other way...
Law enforcement body use equipment and powers granted them for specific purpose and misuse them for their own amusement and self-aggrandisement, possibly breaking Data Protection laws along the way.
 
Llamaman said:
Or, to spin it the other way...
Law enforcement body use equipment and powers granted them for specific purpose and misuse them for their own amusement and self-aggrandisement, possibly breaking Data Protection laws along the way.
Click to expand...

Maybe so but it is still being given coverage, waste of resources etc. than it deserves

Person responsible should be given a slap on the wrist, told not to do it again and that should be the end of it
 
Keith W said:
Maybe so but it is still being given coverage, waste of resources etc. than it deserves

Person responsible should be given a slap on the wrist, told not to do it again and that should be the end of it
Click to expand...
Why? They have done nothing wrong.
 
nilagin said:
Why? They have done nothing wrong.
Click to expand...
You think tweeting celeb gossip is an appropriate activity for a police force? I think it cheapens them.
What's sad is, my opinion of the police is already so jaded that I can't be bothered to feel strongly about this.
Police embarrass themselves again? Meh.
 
nilagin said:
Why? They have done nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

Wrong, perhaps not.
But really, what was the purpose of posting it in the first place?
 
Is this the same police who are taking severe cuts & find themselves with so little time that they can't even respond to certain crimes!?
 
KIPAX said:
someone takes picture of well known comedian and puts on twitter... whats the problem? talk about mountains out of molehills
Click to expand...

I agree TBH, police show lighter side to life, get shot down in flames.
 
As already mentioned, it's probably the fact that it was a person going about their lawful business. Had it been a criminal I think everyone would be OK with it, well apart from the criminal that is :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top