Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 634 posts

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#201

Post by nathanaldensr »

afavour wrote: post #143
phpisthebest wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not aware of a context where virtue signaling would be a good practice or behavior.

Perhaps we're working to different definitions of the term. To me, virtue signaling is signaling (i.e. making publicly known) a virtuous act. To me that seems like an unambiguously good thing: it is likely to inspire others to similar virtuous acts, creating a feedback loop of people encouraging others to engage in good behaviour. "I voted! You should get out and vote too" feels like an example of positive virtual si…

I agree that folks need to have a discerning eye on this. There are several channels on YouTube where lawn care guys will mow an overgrown yard for free. Yes, they are filming it and hoping to drum up interest in their channel, but providing free lawn care is objectively a kind and expensive thing to do. In these cases, the amount of effort expended being actually kind makes it obvious it's not just some stage with props.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#202

Post by giarc »

V-2 wrote: post #148

This is a form of douchebaggery, sure, but "dehumanised" seems a bit out of proportion here. I'd reconsider such phrases out of respect for all the people who have been genuinely dehumanised throughout history, if nothing else.

I agreed until I read that news stories covering the video described her as an "elderly woman" and a "heartbreaking tale". She might be "senior" by definition, but it doesn't mean she would describe herself as "elderly".

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#203

Post by duncan_idaho »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #100
nkozyra wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's much case for a lawsuit. The mall has a right to kick you out for doing so but once it's done there's not much legal recourse in the U.S.

In the US you'd need permission to film the location, and without a release you could be stopped from using the video commercially (social media can count as commercial use if the uploader profits from views) This can cover public places too, some localities require a permit to film a public place for commercial use.

Some courts have ruled requiring permits and fees for commercial filming constitute 1st amendment violations because they are content-based restrictions on free speech.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#204

Post by CPLX »

phpisthebest wrote: post #174
CPLX wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between the two of them is that due to historical specifics, the social media companies have Section 230, which completely immunizes them from dealing with the consequences of any of their actions. Without that they'd be subject to the same constraints as your average newspaper or TV station. Which is to say not a lot of constraints. But there would in fact be a means to address the consequences of the…

Given the clear editorial choices via moderation that the platforms have chosen to undertake I would be in favor of treating them like a newspaper of TV Station

Yup. The second you prioritize one piece of content over another by other than an automatic means like chronological order or votes you're not presenting user generated content any more, you're making editorial decisions.

The fact that we've tolerated this for so long is appalling.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#205

Post by analyst74 »

> A friend contacted Maree that evening, sharing the uploaded video. At the time, Maree “didn’t think much of it”.

> But after seeing the TikTok video featured in media reports describing her as an “elderly woman” with a “heartbreaking tale,” she said she “felt dehumanised”.

Not trying to support the tiktoker, who is obviously a douchebag. But it's interesting that the negative emotions didn't trigger until it becomes news.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#206

Post by btilly »

winternett wrote: post #156
naillo wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how these videos say they're intended to spread love and encourage random acts of kindness, but the actual effect of them is decreasing trust in strangers (that they might be filming us for their tiktok). This makes me not trust anyone that goes up to me in the street.

So much of the content I see now on TikTok and other apps is totally staged, and quite often poorly staged at that. It would be interesting to know who funds the production of many of the videos, because there's obviously an advertising scheme or some sort of moneymaking ploy behind a lot of it. I think things really took off with the people who were making "gold-digger" videos, where a guy tries to talk to a girl an…

The staged stuff doesn't bother me as much as the dangerous stuff:

https://www.fastcompany.com/90287323/people-are-falling-off-...

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#207

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

phpisthebest wrote: post #88
silicon2401 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree much more with your wording of the idea, though I still believe 100% it's possible to do something kind with the intention of filming it. If someone wants to donate a million dollars to me they're welcome to film it on a million cameras if they want

The flip side here is agreement on both sides, for me that is the moral question. Not that it was filmed, but that all parties should agreed to the filming. Prearranging to film giving you a million dollars, is very different from just showing up an putting camera's in your face with out your foreknowledge or consent

i think we are discussing separate points

OP commingled morals and kindness when his intent (now obvious to me after rereading) was to explicitly discuss morality of the situation.

You are exploring the morality of performing an action that violates moral norms (in this case, expectation of privacy)

We were exploring whether it is possible to be kind from an act if the end goal is obtain valuable exchange, off the act

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#208

Post by treis »

V-2 wrote: post #148

This is a form of douchebaggery, sure, but "dehumanised" seems a bit out of proportion here. I'd reconsider such phrases out of respect for all the people who have been genuinely dehumanised throughout history, if nothing else.

Maybe I don't get it but this doesn't even rate as douchebaggery to me. At worst it's a minor inconvenience but mostly it's free flowers.

The blast on TikTok might rate but she's not portrayed in a negative light. Personally I just find it all very weird.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#209

Post by goodpoint »

phpisthebest wrote: post #93
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really a shame people turned virtue signaling into a dirty world that can't be used in civil discussion. It is a great descriptor for all sorts of human behavior in all sorts of contexts. Edit: y'all are kind of proving my first point.

I am not aware of a context where virtue signaling would be a good practice or behavior.

Most people now use "virtue signaling" as as insult to quickly dismiss any person expressing ethical concerns.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#210

Post by jancsika »

phpisthebest wrote: post #78
nonrandomstring wrote: post #40

The reason this act breaks a moral boundary is that it subverts a principle of "ends" [1]. A genuine random act of kindness cannot occur if it's being filmed. Filming the act turns it into a virtue display. It also turns the subject into an object of utility, a means and not and end in themself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Ends

Social Media has largely exposed the levels of narcissism embedded in a large number of human's psychological makeup , Selfies, clout chasing and virtue signalling are ever increasing forms of narcissism that really has destroyed the internet IMO

It's similar with C. Who knew the levels of memory unsafety embedded in a large number of human's psychological makeup!

Luckily, now that Rust exists, our collective psychological makeup is proven to be much safer.

But of course on a deeper physical level, hertzbleed shows that all of us are one Javascript away from becoming Manchurian candidates.

Post reply on HN