We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
IMAGINE FOR A a moment that you’re on a bus with your daughter (let’s say she’s 5 years old). The bus stops and some passengers climb on. As they file past you, looking for their seats, a man goes past and, pausing, pulls out his mobile phone and takes a photograph, seemingly of your little girl. You immediately get annoyed and confront him. You tell him you feel the act is inappropriate, that you’re not comfortable with it.
He protests that he means no harm – in fact, he wasn’t taking a photo of your child at all, he was actually trying to capture a shop window display he only noticed through the bus window as he was going past. He is an interior designer, and it caught his eye – you and your child just happened to be in the shot.
He seems genuine, but you’re still uncomfortable – you don’t want your daughter’s image shared online without your permission (regardless of the reason). But what can you do about it?
The story I have just recounted happened last year to a friend of mine, and she still talks about it with horror. When she asked me what she could do, I’m afraid I wasn’t much help, because the answer is: very little.
There is no law prohibiting someone from taking a photo of your child without your consent in a public place (as long as the photo is not intimate or obscene, and the behaviour while taking it was not threatening or aggressive), and the vagaries continue when it comes to the possibility of such photos being posted on the internet.
This week a video and a photograph respectively have been brought to my attention – images of children used online to illustrate various points by individuals with no connection to the kids depicted (one was political, another to sell a product).
One of the photos, in particular, was of a class of uniformed children taken at a school. It was clear that the photo was being used without the permission of either the school or any of the children involved, but investigation proved that it had been sourced from the school’s social media account, making it – legally at least – fair game for use (I’ll come back to that point later).
The situation got me thinking about the whole issue of how we use images of our kids, and what rights the children themselves have in the interaction.
The obvious starting point in all of this is: who legally owns the photos you share online?
Once an image gets into circulation, it’s hard to get it out
It’s is quite a complex issue, and boils down to the thorny difference between ownership and license to use. When you sign up to sites like Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, you’ll find, in the terms and conditions, that while you own any photographs and images you upload, you are giving the platform provider permission to “use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, publish, transmit, display and distribute” any of your content, including photos that you post.
Flickr, one of the most popular photo sharing websites, actually claim the right to modify your pictures. And any profit made from this usage will most certainly not be shared with you.
Think of it like this: posting pictures online is similar to parking your car in the Flickr (or Facebook, or Twitter or Instagram) carpark. The car still belongs to you, but by parking it there, you are giving the executives the right not just to drive it whenever they feel like doing so, but they can get it resprayed and have gullwing doors installed so they can rent it out to some boy racers (and not a penny of the proceeds will go to you).
And it is worth remembering that, once an image gets out onto the worldwide web, it is very hard to get it out of circulation.
Some years ago I was called to a primary school. A couple of children had started fighting in the yard. A student teacher was on duty and intervened and broke up the fight, but not before she spent a couple of minutes videoing the fracas on her mobile phone. She uploaded the video to Youtube.
In today’s school environment legal action would certainly have been taken. Schools these days have policies about how images of the children in attendance are used, and permission would have to be given by parents if an image is to go on any social media (most schools operate their own social media accounts, which is where the image I discussed earlier was found), but back then the laws around such things were even more vague.
Needless to say parents were informed, apologies were made. The video was, of course, removed.
Only it wasn’t. Years later my daughter showed me the exact same video on another website – there were numerous comments about how funny the footage was (two little girls battering the heads off one another). I made the necessary calls and had that one taken down, too.
But I have a feeling I haven’t seen the last of it.
I knew it the uploading of the footage wasn’t meant maliciously. I felt kind of sorry for the student teacher, who wasn’t a bad kid and realised very quickly that she had made a colossal mistake.
The footage may have, technically and legally, belonged to her. But those two girls also have a right to their own identities, and the uploading of the footage could have been deeply distressing to them. They should surely be in control of their personal narrative?
The child’s rights
Okay, it’s time for full disclosure: if you go on my social media pages you will find photos of my family, some of whom are children: my niece, my nephews and my grandson. All such images have gone up with the permission of their parents (because my pages are public, I’m always careful about that), but I had never really considered the child’s rights in all this. I didn’t ask the kids permission before posting.
I believe I should have and I will from now on, but I already know what they’re going to say. I’m pretty certain they will be okay with it.
Children today, growing up in a world where everyone has a phone with a camera about their person at all times, are used to having their photos taken. My grandson knew how to pose before he knew how to walk.
But is this a good thing?
Maybe we should all think a little more deeply about the images we share.
To finish, here are three things to think about before posting a photo or video online (of your kids or anyone else):
If you think images of your child have been shared without permission this website has some useful information.
Shane Dunphy is a child protection expert and author. He is Head of the Social Care Department at Waterford College of Further Education.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Jeez, summit fever must have got to him to push on without her. Lower oxygen levels in death zone can’t have helped with rational decision making either.
To be fair she may have just seemed tired. Cerebral oedema affects individuals in different ways, and the onset of the first symptoms is sometimes mistaken for tiredness or a minor illness. She may have looked OK and made a good decision to halt her ascent – there may have been no apparent reason for him to abort too.
“didn’t mean anything to me” that’s what you call the ultimate regret
“It seems that people have this warped idea of vegans being malnourished and weak,” Strydom was quoted as saying.
By climbing the seven summits we want to prove that vegans can do anything and more.”
And now she’s dead…that didn’t really work out too well for the aul vegan crusade they were after and this gobshïte is still bangin on about it, some things are best left unsaid…maybe a steak sandwich might’ve got her top and back.
You are a knob. End of.
If you put down your sandwich and actually read the article you’d see that quote is from her before they started the challenge.
And if you picked your beard out of your face you’d see the second half of the comment
What second half? “This g*bshite is still banging on about it”. The vegan quote is from the lady who died.
Very insensitive the man has lost his wife. You have no class
Vegans can speak after the die ???
He lost his wife taking a huge risk, for what?
She got Ill climbing the world’s most dangerous peak,in the area known as the death zone,what is he confused about?
I imagine He is confused because he lost (quite possibly) the love of his life. That kind of loss, no matter what the circumstances, is confusing when you are lost in grief. No doubt they both prepared for the trip, never thinking that either one would die. My thoughts are with him and her family.
I’m sorry to detract from this man’s loss or the article in question but that’s an amazing picture of Everest.
It’s a pity there was no finer crusade, cause or endeavour they could have chosen – No unfortunate people they could have decided to help out or aid in some manner. No they had to climb a mountain in the noble defence of the physical attributes and potency of people who have chosen to be Vegans. Sorry now but what a massive loss to humanity.
Run a marathon if you want to punish yourself.
Go help at an old peoples home or volunteer at a homeless shelter if you want to help people
Mountains take too many lives, you never get answers. That man has my sincerest sympathy.
Sooo does that mean vegans are weak then?
I was privileged to meet two sherpa brothers a few months ago who hold the record for the most times to climb Everest. Tough tough men, I’d never understand what it takes to climb Everest and the effects on the body but it’s unimaginable for me that if I did I’d leave my wife to continue on alone. That would haunt me forever.
Very sad :(
If you suspect someone has altitude sickness, you descend immediately. If reaching the summit meant nothing why did he do it?
Her time was up, simple as that, everybody dies so it shouldn’t come as a suprise,we’re all just a heartbeat away , enjoy it while u can
The story reminds me of the tower of babloyn in the Bible ,when people believed they could reach the highest peak to touch God an so built it ,until God changed there languages untill they became so confused ,they couldn’t go higher . so God was showing people they could not live by bread , human communication alone ,but by every word that comes from God ,food that is neither steak or vegetables .I think this man is only starting a climb of a life time ,the way he talks of it ,I feel sorry for him.He really did love her , but they choose there fate on that Lowe peak an it was a choice they both agreed onn wat I learn is choices decisions mwy seem good an right , but could be way off regarding a person’s health well been even if we think it’s the right choice .an sometim s the wrong choice can be the right one ,only God knows why he took her .an he is left with a mountain climb with a twist
Oh right, so twas god that took her. OK then.
Allow the woman the dignity of her own volition. She chose this endeavour and its risks. She died because of oxygen starvation to the brain and organs, most likely, not because some myth ‘took her’ for reasons unknown.
I hope her husband finds a way through this grief and gets back to family and friends for some solid support.
God didn’t take her cause God doesn’t exist. But he probably would red thumb you if he could.
have your say