Glasgow Guide Home

Whats On Glasgow Guide
  Glasgow What's On


    Glasgow Reviews


    Glasgow Gallery


      Glasgow Links
Discuss | Guestbook | Postcard | News | Weather | Feedback | Search | About | What's New
Glasgow Guide Discussion Boards

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )                >> View Today's Topics <<

9 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Braehead In Anti-terror Photo Row, Police cite terror laws over family photo
Alex MacPhee
post 11th Oct 2011, 04:01pm
Post #46


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,741
Joined: 1st Nov 2008
From: Surrey, UK
Member No.: 6,183
QUOTE (Jim D @ 11th Oct 2011, 04:28pm) *
As much as I agree that the security officer was a jobsworth and the matter could have been dealt with differently, If I had been the person involved I would not have contacted the media under any circumstances and thereafter turn my day out with my child into a media frenzy.

Different people will of course have differing perspectives on what would be the best course of action. But it is certainly clear here that the involvement of the media and the consequent bad publicity for Braehead has resulted in a very public change in and clarification of their policy on photography that is unlikely to have happened otherwise. You only have those freedoms you're prepared to defend.


--------------------
Alex
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tommy Kennedy
post 11th Oct 2011, 04:03pm
Post #47

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 3,510
Joined: 28th Jul 2003
Member No.: 54
I had a similar experience a few years ago. 'Roman soldiers' in Chester were puting on a display, surrounded by kids, including my 3 wee g/kids - me taking photos..
I was appproached by 'Park security'; telling me if it was a digi camera I would have to delete photos. I refused, said he'd send for cops - 'I'll wait' you gonna ask all these tourists taking photos to stop?'
No cops turned up
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
droschke7
post 11th Oct 2011, 04:17pm
Post #48


Lord Provost
*****
Posts: 314
Joined: 29th Jul 2003
From: Whiteinch
Member No.: 128
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 11th Oct 2011, 05:47pm) *
Different people will of course have differing perspectives on what would be the best course of action. But it is certainly clear here that the involvement of the media and the consequent bad publicity for Braehead has resulted in a very public change in and clarification of their policy on photography that is unlikely to have happened otherwise. You only have those freedoms you're prepared to defend.

this appears to be a bad case of "Traffic Warden Syndrom" otherwise known as "Little Hitler Syndrom"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jupiter
post 11th Oct 2011, 04:49pm
Post #49

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 4,104
Joined: 27th Oct 2009
From: Home in the`burbs.
Member No.: 7,675
Tommy,It wasnt the camera that drew their attention it was you dressed up as Nero with the toga and laurel crown. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*Skeedaddle*
post 11th Oct 2011, 05:00pm
Post #50






It may appear harsh but there are perverts out there and sometimes overkill is the only policy that is left to the authorities to protect the rest of us, accept it, it is true.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alex MacPhee
post 11th Oct 2011, 05:02pm
Post #51


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,741
Joined: 1st Nov 2008
From: Surrey, UK
Member No.: 6,183
QUOTE (droschke7 @ 11th Oct 2011, 06:03pm) *
this appears to be a bad case of "Traffic Warden Syndrom" otherwise known as "Little Hitler Syndrom"

I've met this myself, and had a very full apology from Mothercare, after one of their employees objected to me taking pictures of my daughter buying a pram for her first baby, pictures destined for the Baby Book the family had been compiling. The excuse I was given when I challenged his reason for stopping me was, somewhat bizarrely, that I could be photographing the shelf display for a competitor. Yes, really, that's what he said.

I sent Mothercare the photo I'd actually taken, of my daughter smiling talking to another staff assistant who'd been helping her, and explaining how we'd used Mothercare when having our own children, and that naturally we had turned to Mothercare for our grown-up children's children. The next photograph I included was that of my daughter buying the same pram in another store, and the sale they had lost.

They replied quickly to say that there was no such no-photography policy as I'd been told in the shop, that they only photographs they didn't like were those associated with competitions of any kind, and they enclosed a bunch of gift vouchers for my daughter. They responded sensibly, and in this case, it looks like Braehead have too. They've held their hands up, admitted it was a mistake, and changed their policy. Have to applaud them for that display of common sense.


--------------------
Alex
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
d.c.
post 11th Oct 2011, 05:28pm
Post #52

Super Lord Provost
*****
Posts: 479
Joined: 27th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 19
From what I recall, this ban on photographs being taken in shopping centres and some other public buildings was introduced following the Glasgow Airport terror attack. Investigations after that event uncovered the fact that those involved had been taking photos in the St Enoch Centre in the days or weeks leading up to the airport incident, and I believe it was suspected those photos might have been part of their planning to target the St Enoch Centre too. Had those men been challenged by security at the St Enoch Centre, they could probably have justifiably claimed that they were only taking family photos too, as two of them were brothers.

Perhaps management at various shopping centres leave security staff with no discretion or flexibility on the issue. They appear to be very strict at Silverburn Shopping Centre for example, where it is quite a common sight to see security stopping parents from taking photos of their kids at the fountains.

But on my last visit to Braehead, I was quite pleased with how speedily security dealt with an incident. I saw a man on the first floor level with a large zoom lens on his camera, leaning on the railing and taking photos of something on the ground floor. When I looked over to see what he might be taking photos of, I could see that his zoom lens was pointing directly towards some toddlers who were playing while their parents sat nearby on benches. I thought at first he might have been an official shopping centre photographer, but I was suspicious too that he might have had other motives, and that those parents on the lower level might have no idea that their kids were being photographed. As I looked around for a security officer, I saw one running up the escalator and straight to the photographer, who was briefly questioned, and then led away.

So it does make me wonder with this latest incident, how that father may feel if he discovered from security that someone else was also taking photos of his child without his knowledge or permission. Would he object if that stranger was treated the way he was ?

Only one side of this story has been sold to the media and although the situation could perhaps have been handled better, I think security staff are in a no-win situation when trying to protect the public, whether it's from terrorists or perverts.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ashfield
post 11th Oct 2011, 06:38pm
Post #53


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 8,400
Joined: 3rd Mar 2009
From: Brigadoon
Member No.: 6,611
I agree with you on the issue of the role of security staff, they often have a difficult job to do and are not the best paid in the world. It is easy to blame them when the real issue was the policy of barring photography at Braehead (and other venues).

My interest in photography goes back to my schooldays when I first developed and printed my own films. Since then I have been a keen amateur and a member of a long standing camera club. I have been looking back at some the photo's I have taken over the years and it is likely that I would have challenged if I were to try to take some of them now. The magnificent Gorbals Boys by Bert Hardy might never have been taken as would much of the work of Oscar Marzaroli. A local man here was recently denied permission, by our Council, to take photo's of flowers in a local park!

Over the piece, I learned when it was not "prudent" to take photo's. It hasn't ruined my hobby but it sure makes lie more difficult at times.


--------------------
If you want to make God laugh, tell him about your plans (Woody Allen)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alex MacPhee
post 11th Oct 2011, 07:53pm
Post #54


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,741
Joined: 1st Nov 2008
From: Surrey, UK
Member No.: 6,183
QUOTE (d.c. @ 11th Oct 2011, 07:14pm) *
From what I recall, this ban on photographs being taken in shopping centres and some other public buildings was introduced following the Glasgow Airport terror attack.

I don't believe that's the origin, it has been happening much longer than that.

There is an irony here. After the July 7th bombings in London, the police were appealing for members of the public to send them any photographs they had taken in the vicinity, that might lead to valuable clues to the identity and movements of the bombers. Suppose the photographer father, in this instance (thankfully not the case) had in his photograph an image of someone later deemed responsible for a terrorist or similar action?

QUOTE
Investigations after that event uncovered the fact that those involved had been taking photos in the St Enoch Centre in the days or weeks leading up to the airport incident

The logic here is thin. If I wanted to take a photograph of a building, absolutely nobody would know about it. I certainly wouldn't use a look-at-me DSLR. I could be standing on the street making a call on my mobile phone. I could be using a small pen-shaped USB device to connect later to my computer. If I seriously wanted to take photographs undetected, there are too many ways to choose from.

What we seem to be seeing here is a kind of collective institutional hysteria, which can mean that the next generation will have no photographs of themselves growing up in their natural environments, doing ordinary things, because the Photo Nazis have been patrolling society's streets to prevent it, leaving us only with CCTV traces of our existence. Ironic, in a country that has more surveillance cameras per head of population than anywhere on the planet.

QUOTE
Only one side of this story has been sold to the media and although the situation could perhaps have been handled better, I think security staff are in a no-win situation when trying to protect the public, whether it's from terrorists or perverts.

It is not the job of shopping mall 'security staff' to protect the public. We have police for that. Their job is to protect the goods and property of their employers. In the old days they were called floorwalkers, nightwatchmen, or janitors. 'Security' is a PR puff expression.


--------------------
Alex
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
janeyteegee
post 11th Oct 2011, 08:25pm
Post #55


Unpacking
*
Posts: 8
Joined: 2nd Apr 2011
From: Ontario,Canada
Member No.: 10,787
WoW this is an amazing story to read,, I have to say when my sister
& I were over in '2010' we took dozens of pictures all over the place,including St Enoch Centre while shopping,,sitting in 'the queue'
at Buchanan St station waiting for the bus back to 'Kirky',, also many
of Partick with people walking bye us,,,

I've taken pictures of visiting relatives here in our many large 'Malls'
maybe we are a bit slow here as I haven't been arrested yet,,,,

Janey
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TeeHeeHee
post 11th Oct 2011, 09:28pm
Post #56


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 14,309
Joined: 25th Jan 2009
From: German/French/Swiss border town on the River Rhein
Member No.: 6,448
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 11th Oct 2011, 08:39pm) *
It is not the job of shopping mall 'security staff' to protect the public. We have police for that. Their job is to protect the goods and property of their employers. In the old days they were called floorwalkers, nightwatchmen, or janitors. 'Security' is a PR puff expression.

A shrewd observation that might be lost on a lot of people.
Store security personnel are exactly that.
As for the amount of CCTV cameras ... Remember the commotion when it was announced that CCTV cameras would be introduced which would also able to pick up conversation?
This is all your own protection folks.
Did they die the death, or were they softly softly introduced anyway?
Boy do I feel good knowing that where I'm living no one is interested in the integrated camera on my pocket sized X10 binoculars. cool.gif biggrin.gif


--------------------
"Destiny is a good thing to accept when it's going your way. When it isn't, don't call it destiny; call it injustice, treachery, or simple bad luck.”
― Joseph Heller, God Knows
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Elma
post 12th Oct 2011, 04:44am
Post #57


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 6,905
Joined: 29th Dec 2004
From: Originally Annan with a wee bit of Glasgow in between now Kimberley, B.C.
Member No.: 1,650
QUOTE (d.c. @ 11th Oct 2011, 06:14pm) *
So it does make me wonder with this latest incident, how that father may feel if he discovered from security that someone else was also taking photos of his child without his knowledge or permission. Would he object if that stranger was treated the way he was ?

Only one side of this story has been sold to the media and although the situation could perhaps have been handled better, I think security staff are in a no-win situation when trying to protect the public, whether it's from terrorists or perverts.

I absolutely agree d.c. How would any of the posters on here feel if it was their child who was being photographed by someone without their knowledge. The security staff at Braehead did not know it was the father, he could have been inside paying (am assuming this as I don't know Braehead) and reacted to a man taking a photograph of a child.

My grandson had a security job in a Calgary mall while going to College, he had the authority to approach anyone taking a photograph if he felt it was suspicious. He was there to protect the shoppers in the mall as well as the merchants.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*James*
post 12th Oct 2011, 05:42am
Post #58






A security guy has no right to tell somebody to stay where they are. I would walk away and if he laid a finger on me it would be assault. We lost it and the people do nothing, this man fought back, good on him.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 12th Oct 2011, 07:06am
Post #59


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
QUOTE (Elma @ 12th Oct 2011, 05:30am) *
I absolutely agree d.c. How would any of the posters on here feel if it was their child who was being photographed by someone without their knowledge. The security staff at Braehead did not know it was the father, he could have been inside paying (am assuming this as I don't know Braehead) and reacted to a man taking a photograph of a child. ...

Hi Elma, unfortunately, in this case, neither the security guards nor the police (according to Mr White) at any time attempted to establish the relationship between the adult taking the photo and the child being photographed.

Mr White made the further point that, had this not been the case of a legitimate family photograph, then both the guards and the professionals would have been at fault as they allowed him to leave with the child with their full consent. I think this is one aspect of the incident which prompted the father to action, i.e. that the authorities acted in defence of the rights of property owners (using anti-terror laws) and ignored the potential wellbeing and safety of the child.

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 12th Oct 2011, 07:21am
Post #60


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
One other point I would like to raise is in the defence of the employees acting as security guards. Unfortunately, like many other jobs in the service/retail industry, this has become one of long hours, poor pay, bad conditions and inadequate training, resulting in high staff turnover rates.

Given the damage that this incident has caused to Braehead, and probably to shopping centres in the UK in general, it is IMO about time that employers valued the important role with security professionals have to play in their business models. These staff face high-value and high-risk situations daily, and have to balance the – often competing – interests of their empoyers, fellow workers and customers. It is a job which requires a professional, skilled approach, but all too often employers simply look to get the job done at the cheapest cost.

On that note, it was to note from the Independent newspaper that:
QUOTE
How did Glasgow's Braehead shopping centre – wheresecurity guards called police after a dad tookphotos of his daughter eating ice cream – blunder into such a PR disaster? In addition to Braehead's own press office, there's a PR agency (MacDonald Media) for the centre, while owner Capital Shopping Centre employs three more agencies – Hudson Sandler, College Hill and Porterfield PR. What have they all been up to?

Perhaps if the owners had spent less time and money employing so many PR agencies, and more time and resources on security staff, they would not be in the position they find themselves today!

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > » 
Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd Oct 2019

All material in the site Glasgow Guide is copyright of the Glasgow Guide Organisation. This material is for your own private use only, and no part of the site may be reproduced, amended, modified, copied, or transmitted to third parties, by any means whatsoever without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. All rights reserved.

Glasgow Hotels: book cheap hotels in Glasgow online now.