by ‘Sola Fagorusi
The growing use of the social media space continues to bewilder and also raise several issues. Cyber privacy subjects, moral consideration and ethical issues are some of the dust raised by our generation’s adoption of the social media as a dependable tool. Nigerians would recall the ‘Uche Face your work’ audio recording that went viral earlier this year. The confidentiality rights of the customer have since been debated especially given the flood of commentary and comic adaptions that followed the viral conversation. Expectedly, the affected telecom company, Etisalat, informed the world that it was not a commercial from its stable but rather a possible measure by competitors and distractors ‘who are adapting measures on how to cope with the competitive market.’
Late last year, in company of 23 other young people, I was part of the ‘Through my Eyes’ project by the British Council, Nigeria. The different teams in the group had the task of putting together pictures of their communities with an appreciative enquiry in mind. Most aptly put, each team of writer and photographer had to tell the stories of their communities from a positive perspective using pictures and creative words. My team’s work was titled Urine Baby. One of the pictures, like any other work of art, generated conversations along the spectrum of gender, cyber rights and ethics. The said picture was of a woman on the street squatting to urinate by the road side. Her side view was captured by in the picture. We had chanced on the moment as we scoured the city for pictures in a moving vehicle. We also anticipated these discussions as we had ours with a small circle of friends before the decision of whether or not to let it be part of our final submission.
It was an undesirable moment and we were sure that the issue of open defecation and other public health concerns would be pushed to the public through the picture. Especially since the axiom that a picture is worth a thousand words still holds. The conversation the picture generated after a friend shared it on her timeline on Facebook to help garner public votes for the entry was enlightening and educative. A good number of the commentaries were from members of Nigeria’s burgeoning art community. One commentary hinted at the sad story of Faienne Cherisma, the 15-year old Haitian girl who was hit by a stray bullet while scavenging for supplies following the 2010 earthquake in Port-au-Prince. A picture showing a group of journalist flocking around the late girl to take her picture was a subject of heated controversy. The debate was/is centred around the ethics of the photographer’s action. Also referred to was the iconic photo shot by Kevin Carter in March 1993; it was a picture of a vulture preying upon an emaciated Sudanese toddler near the village of Ayod. Carter committed suicide three months after even though he won the Pulitzer Prize for this photo.
Was it right to take and share these pictures in public spaces? In the Urine Baby’s instance wasn’t it a case of ‘what privacy there is in a public space especially when one decides to do a private thing in public?’ Another commentary frowned at the idea submitting that she was only having a private moment and she had no intention of having it shared with the internet. He thought the picture exploitative. Amidst this, the discussion switched to gender as another comment asked if the thought would have been the same if it was a man and not a woman in the said picture. Another comment opined that the picture was provocative and not exploitative. One of the comments also contextualised the work in the art form especially since it is a reflection of who we are.
Beyond all of these, I am interested in the legal perspective to this. The rules seem to be subjective and cyber space only makes us more vulnerable. Do I have a right to sue an individual who has shared an indecent shot of me, say after a party, in public space? When Nigerian actress Omotola Jalade-Ekeinde warned bloggers in Nigeria about sharing the pictures of her 14 years old daughter for instance; was it a bluff or is there really a law out there she can rely on? Does this mean once I am out there in public, I have surrendered my right to privacy. There is currently no law restricting ones access to the use of a camera in public places, except where clearly stated. Military formations and border posts however have one. What is the place of intention in all of these as well? Where does the picture of a child suffering from polio and put up in public place stand?
It is however clear that it will be criminal to photograph someone without consent when ‘they have secluded themselves in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy such as dressing rooms, restrooms, medical facilities, and inside their homes.’
There is also the cultural angle to it. There are societies where pictures for public use are not frowned at; same way there are others where the sight of a camera elicits withdrawal and suspicion. If the purpose of the picture is to inform and educate like in this case, would it count for something? When Chelsea, daughter of former President of the United States, Bill Clinton got married in 2010, the family had all guests surrender their mobile phones before gaining entry. Their reason was obvious.
And when someone copies my profile picture on twitter and uses as he or she deems fit, what does the law says? The privacy and security of data would gather more legal considerations in the years ahead. With the use of mobile phones growing, there would possibly be more cases of urine babies out there. Meanwhile, Urine baby can be viewed and voted for at here and we can continue the conversation @SolaFagro on twitter.
