-qxi8i3ddo5kj.jpg)
The exposure of people through mobile phones sheds light on the clashes between privacy, public interest and cyberbullying
We are seeing more and more footage of people being called out into public spaces for their attitude towards cell phone camera. A recent case is that of the federal deputy Nikolas Ferreira (PL-MG)filmed by journalist and former BBB Anne Paula Renault in flight, just days after the politician delivered a transphobic speech on the rostrum of the Chamber of Deputies, on the occasion of this year’s International Women’s Day.
“You know you could have been arrested, right?” Renault says at the beginning of the video, filming the MP with the camera. From that, Ferreira does the same and starts arguing with her.
The case is far from unprecedented. During the last World Cup, singer Gilberto Gil was approached this way by the Bolsonarists, who have uttered terms such as “Let’s go, Lei Rouanet”, “Let’s go, Bolsonaro” and “Thank you, son of a bitch…”.
Even anonymous people take this approach. In 2019, a woman was approached by a man while she was picking flowers in a sidewalk bed. He continued to embarrass her, telling her she shouldn’t have done that.
I don’t think I’ve ever been so sad watching a video. I just want to find this girl, fill her with love and flowers #FioriPerAdriana pic.twitter.com/bmSXVEnAdq
— cauã (@breawkup) March 21, 2019
Experts say to Byte That digital democratization it has broken down important frontiers in this area, some of which not even the laws are capable of reconstructing. About 95% of Brazilian households have people with cell phones, according to the latest ICT Household Survey by the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br).
Three of these digital audience divides are most threatened: the divide between professionalism and amateurism; that of privacy and the public interest; and between an act of citizenship you hate cyberbullying.
What does the law say
To date, there is no specific law for situations where people are approached and filmed without consent and/or in public spaces, such as the cases mentioned above. But this type of attitude has some legal protections, such as:
- The Federal Constitution, which mentions as an individual and inviolable right “to privacy, private life, honor and the image of persons”. It also guarantees the right of reply in case of moral damages;
- The civil code, whose article 20 says that the exhibition cannot violate “good reputation, respectability and honour”;
- The penal code, with its articles 139 and 140, which punishes with imprisonment from one month to three years, in addition to a fine, anyone who defames or insults someone. It also brings the hypothesis of a crime in the unauthorized recording of intimate images.
The judiciary is balanced in judging cases on a case-by-case basis, mainly considering whether the person filming is doing it for personal reasons or to defend a public interest.
In many situations these rights also come into conflict, which is common, according to lawyers, in the life of the Judiciary. It is up to the courts, from then on, to judge each specific action to understand which right will be favored at the moment.
“Legislation doesn’t carry the ruler, it goes from case to case,” he says William Clafkeresearcher at FGV law.
Although the law does not provide exceptions to rights such as image rights, extraordinary aspects are taken into consideration in adjudicating cases. Examples of this are the exercise of journalism and the image of famous people.
Professional exposure in amateur hands
Exposure of people on video, per se, isn’t exactly new. It is a consequence of the role of journalism itself, in disseminating information of public interest.
Examples of this are reporting of problems in neighborhoods and communities on local news and due diligence of government officials. Or the painting “Protests Já”, from the CQC program (2008-2015).
In politics, many have used this resource as a strategy to leverage projects and their image. As examples of this we have Celsus Russoman (Republicanos-SP), which became known for addressing shopkeepers in a consumer rights framework for television news; AND Arthur of Val (União Brasil-SP), owner of the YouTube channel said the motherwhere he discussed cell phone in hand with people presumably leftists.
“Politicians crossed the line between the intimate and the private and started turning their intimate life into a kind of show. From then on, they gave room for questions at all hours of the day. The idea of a private life was draining out,” he says Mario Aquino Alvesprofessor of public policy at the São Paulo School of Business Administration (FAESP FGV).
But even a class that has a professional code of conduct, like journalists, can sometimes struggle to respect boundaries. The classic cases of paparazzi stalking celebrities, for example, exist in droves.
The problem, the researchers point out, becomes even more complex when anyone with a cell phone steps out of the passive position in the news and can construct their own content.
“There is a curiosity about the lives of others related to the need for belonging and social recognition. With technology, there is a false sense of anonymity and impunity, which opens up an immense possibility for people to think that this is peaceful and natural, without any consequences,” he says Cicelia Tenaglia Batistaprofessor of communication at the Escola Superior de Propaganda and Marketing (ESPM).
Privacy versus public interest
Kim Kataguiri (Uniao Brasil-SP) he has been a federal deputy since 2018. Before that, he was on the other side of the issue: together with other activists from the Free Brazil Movement, he used the image of politicians to defend his ideas and attack opponents on social media. Nowadays, he considers the filming legitimate.
“People who are public have less right to honor than ordinary people. Exposure and criticism are part of democracy and are legitimate,” he says.
However, he points out that there are “limits” that must be respected. “When I’m in a movement, in a protest, that’s fine. But if I’m in a restaurant with my family, I think it’s inappropriate.”
Kataguiri said Byte that one of his main “defense” weapons against unwanted exposure is to shoot the opponent.
“Some small influencers have already done this. I would respond in their video and at the same time already take out my cellphone to make sure I get a response if they post it,” she says.
“All people have the right to image and honour, but, for those who represent some kind of public interest, there is some flexibility. The courts have ruled in favor of freedom of expression,” he says Guilherme Klafke, of FGV Direito.
But the same is not the case for exposures that occur for individual reasons, where the two people are anonymous, he warns.
“In the personal sphere, the image is considered a biometric data. It is necessary to have a purpose and the person’s free, informed and unambiguous consent. “, he says.
Act of Citizenship or Cyberbullying?
But experts warn that the whole situation can be psychologically traumatic. Anyone contemplating entering public life and concerned about undue exposure should think twice about the decision, as videos forever record a person’s image.
“Even in adults exposure has great damage, as it is a record. The person builds his image over time and a situation in which this image is distorted can be devastating and even cause depression. He also has the feeling of insecurity, frustration and helplessness,” she says Sara Bootypsychiatrist and researcher at cyberbullying at the Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP).
Bottino explains that filming people can be considered cyberbullying when there is the intention to repeatedly assault, hurt and humiliate the victim. It would be something much more related to the affirmation of power through social status than a strategy to give visibility to a problem.
“There are situations where this is done as a manifestation of aggression and violence. The motivation may not be clear, it may seem altruistic, but the underlying goal is to tarnish the reputation,” he says.
“In these cases, the defense must be quick, because the public is just as quick. I doubt a little the empathy of social networks. People can express things they wouldn’t do if they were in person”, he defines.
Source: Terra
Rose James is a Gossipify movie and series reviewer known for her in-depth analysis and unique perspective on the latest releases. With a background in film studies, she provides engaging and informative reviews, and keeps readers up to date with industry trends and emerging talents.
