Visual anonymity
The right to free expression sits side-by-side with the right to remain anonymous. However, not all governments value this and many are still debating the pros and cons of a charter of rights that supports anonymity on the internet.
People want to speak out, but not everyone may want to be recognised. The question is, how can we work within such a powerful and visual medium and yet remain anonymous?
Known issues
- Many citizen journalists are not aware of the potential reach of their work, nor issues of consent. Hence, they are unable to forewarn their subjects, nor seek their consent in using an identifiable image.
- Multiple devices may cover the same issue putting everyone within view at risk of being identified whether associated with the event or not.
- Multiple views can, in spite of the risks, ensure a single event may be more positively authenticated.
- The use of paper-based clearance forms, the practice of one-to-one consent, may not be a feasible tool in remote practice, and certainly not in immediate response situations. They too can pose a security threat by the mere fact of their physical properties.
Outstanding issues / research questions
- What means are there to easily explain these complex issues to both citizen journalists and, for example, their interviewees (e.g. WITNESS and YouTube collaboration1)?
- Is there are role for online service providers (see WITNESS, Recommendations for Online and Mobile Service Providers)?
- Explore the notion of embedding the idea of consent into the process of video documentation.