• Media Enquiries

    07505 448925(24hr)

Seen, heard and constantly under surveillance

Two stories have caught my eye in recent days which have left me wondering about the rights of privacy for under-16's.

Classroom CCTV The first is an undeniably creepy story in the Manchester Evening News, which reports that Salford Council has been criticised by the Information Commissioner's Office for filming primary school children in classrooms and, more worryingly, in their gym changing rooms.

In a rare show of commonsense, the assistant commissioner of the ICO ruled that,

"CCTV should only be used for a pressing need. It is perfectly reasonable for a school to use CCTV to help secure its premises, but it shouldn't be left switched on capturing images of school children changing during the day."

I then read about this scheme being piloted in the United States, which allows parents to monitor their children at school 24 hours-a-day via an interactive website. 

Both cases could be classed as unacceptable surveillance. However while the first was roundly condemned, the second has won plaudits. The difference is, of course, the opinion of the parents and what they perceive to be best for their children. 

There are however much wider implications for the effects of anaesthetising future generations to CCTV cameras and surveillance. Freedom, in part, depends on us teaching what freedom is to the youngest in society.

By Dylan Sharpe

Posted on by Big Brother Watch Posted in CCTV

3 Responses to Seen, heard and constantly under surveillance

  1. Old Holborn
  2. Marchamont Needham

    Freedom, in part, depends on us teaching what freedom is to the youngest in society.
    I fear it will be in History lessons.

  3. anononymous

    Normalising the absence of privacy, dignity, confidentiality, thinking, indiviuality, judgement/discretion, the right of the indiviudal to have a normal level of choice and self-determination in their own and their family’s life is dangerous.
    Abusive people are charmingly or uncharmingly, nosey and want to gain access, power and control over the victim’s life. So the big state is unwittingly or not behaving like an abuser and grooming kids to be more easily abused by others, as kids (especially by officals and those labelled good ie ISA cleared) and when they grow up. If the state seeks to label people as “safe” using hearsay, then the kids and adults will at first go by the label rather than thinking, and then later will have good reason not to trust anyone connected with the state or the “good” label given to those whom the state deems safe.
    Communities cannot thrive with this intrusion, and cannot be created from above including by “good” charities.

Add a Comment