11–20 of 634 posts
> She said she had ask whether she was being filmed, and was told “no”. She also said she offered the flowers back to Pawluk.
> the video was “designed to spread love and compassion” Hmmm.... seems more likely designed to get engagement. Presumably he doesn't love the woman, as he doesn't know anything at all about her, so that one is a lie for a start. And I guess he doesn't feel any compassion for her either, as he hasn't taken it down without forcing her to contact him, which she probably doesn't want to do.
Depictions of oneself are part of your identity, but the only way to control such things is via copyright, which is assigned to the person filming. Could really use some new laws here.
It's far from a clear cut law, if you just appear in the corner of a frame or in the background you'd have a hard time winning any lawsuits, but in this case I think the deck would be stacked against the Tiktoker pretty unfavourably.
Personally, I think it's offensive how often these social media posters will use other people for their profits. Doing tricks in front of the camera is a fine way to make some cash or get famous, but when you start filming interactions with other people just for social media clout it's disgusting, narcissistic behaviour. This isn't some fun event that happend spontaneously, this is a planned, well thought out video shoot that puts a stranger in the center of attention in world where any moderate amount of attention can result in death threats from strangers across the globe.
Yesterday on my timeline was a video of a machine in a factory in China that rotates a drum 180 degrees. It had a million views and 30k likes.
I’ve never seen the signal to noise ratio anywhere this terrible for any other social media app.
> If she requests him to take down the video he will do that.
The video should've been taken down already.
I feel the wheel of consent is a wonderful tool for making sense of such situations. Who is actually giving and who is receiving? Did both parties agree to? https://www.wheelofconsent.coach/what-is-the-wheel-of-consen...
https://web.archive.org/web/20210801103538/https://www.wheel...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a person is the main subject of a picture, the photographer (or videographer) needa consent of the model to use that image or vidoe. Already under current law in most places. And most legitimate publishers ask for proof of consent when buying, before publishing such pictures. That social media firms don't care is not a big surprise. Edit: And that influencers think they are above existing laws when it comes to con…
"Just enforce the existing laws in a reasonable manner" seems to be the solution to a lot of problems these days.
> the video was “designed to spread love and compassion” Hmmm.... seems more likely designed to get engagement. Presumably he doesn't love the woman, as he doesn't know anything at all about her, so that one is a lie for a start. And I guess he doesn't feel any compassion for her either, as he hasn't taken it down without forcing her to contact him, which she probably doesn't want to do.
The irony is it that shows the exact opposite of love and compassion. Self-aggrandizement and no regard for others, motivated only by the needs of self, and didn't even spend an extra second with her beyond what was required to execute this vapid stunt.
Mr Beast is incredibly successful at this, in that his stunts produce massive numbers for very little outlay. A friend's kid in his teens was telling me about how he's the most generous person he's ever seen and it make me wince a little as I really don't want to be that guy and wade into it with a "well, actually".
Social media has made the world an incredibly vapid place.