4

Power without responsibility

Posted by ChurpChurp Birdy on 8:05 AM

         Just had a thought that Youtube video sharing on animal abuse has been going viral these day, it come to worst and spread like a wild fire when it is being shared to the social networking sites eg. Facebook. Sounded like the Facebook is the so called accomplice, isn’t it? Well, we believe many of us here will have some common questions to them – Why aren’t you stop him/her but filming it? What on earth for you to get famous online by acting so extreme? and blah blah blah… 



          Same goes to the recent on-hot issue about footage on horrific abuse by an 18- years old Malaysian mother on her 10-month old baby. This 4-minute long disturbing video was filmed by a friend of the mother who concerned about the abuse of the children and taped the incident so that she could pass it to the authority. Surprisingly the video was viewed almost 100,000 times in just a few hours after uploaded; many viewers wanted the woman to be condemned. But people were fooled as the incident happened in last year May and the woman is currently serving for 18-months jail sentence. The intention was unclear why the footage had surface online a year after the event and the leak of footage. ( See more on Digital Journal ) 


          We have the same feeling as the others too, felt pissed off and unjust for the little child's treatment and for the inappropriate parenthood. Probably most of the people and so does us, without aware of it, concerned and questioned only about the morality and child's rights. But when you re-viewing the news, the big question or the core question here- the ownership! The footage was an evidence that should be and only be kept by the police and there is a breaching of the P&C content. Common sense to know that it cannot and must not be shown to the public. Public, on the other hand, unaware of the legal issue of ownership sharing the video uncontrollable at all social networking sites, flaming the issue up. 


         Indeed with the existence of Youtube ( the increased popularity video sharing platform), the revolution of online video has made the ownership of video seems to become an out-dated thought when everything in motion goes digital with a few simple click. No one is really cares about illegal file sharing and the control over the content published unless they got flagged off by someone, reported abused, or maybe even got sued for the serious case. 


         Without killing our common sense, of course the first thing came in mind about ownership will be the online screening. Like what happened to our previously created blog named "YOUTUBE WORLD", programmed online screening disallow people to view our post because it violates the cyberlaw. Ohh...the programming sounds easy,huh? Unfortunately, according to Gerbarg (2008), Youtube is not legally required to screen online uploaded video because that would hinder their performance on site but it would only be done when the copyrighted holders provide the video for test. So the issue of ownership is clearly can't be solved right-away. 


         However in this case, we could not have expected the Malaysian police to hand in the copyrighted video to Youtube in the first place. Who have wondered this video would leak to outside world. Hence when deep thought and rationality came into play, Gerbarg (2008) claimed that the core and the only one resource or supply of Youtube is its community. So whatever happens within or outside the platform, the responsibility will always go back to the Youtube community itself. The online user regardless of video viewer, uploader or people who share it around are no doubt, the most influential, dominating and vigorous 'players'.  They got the power in play but they have played it without responsibility. As mentioned earlier, no one is really cares about ownership thingy. Dr. Shay agreed to the point that the online community is largely ignorant as that the public doesn’t really understand fair use with online video. That is as well indicating a challenge of education in the knowledge field of the copyright infringement in today's ICT world. 


References: 
Gerbarg, D. (2008). Television Goes Digital: Youtube Changes Everything. Springer: New York. 


Crowell, G. (2010). Legal Online Video and Fair Use: Sharing versus Ownership. Retrieved from: http://www.reelseo.com/sharing-vs-ownership/ 


John Thomas. Digital Journal. (2012). Video of Malaysian Mother Abusing 10-Month-Old Baby Goes Viral. Retrieved from: http://digitaljournal.com/article/324670 


4 Comments

chia chia says:
May 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Really "admire" with those who can record a cruel video within a few minute without give out their help to the victim. I'm wondering that what they feel when recording the video. Did they feel sad or pity when seeing the bully case with their real eyes? People may only think that share this video just want to let everyone know what the thing that had done by this cruel mother. However, they do not know this is not their right to share this private video. It may influence the police's investigation process. People can comment anything without based on the fact. Sometimes, misunderstanding can be existed between public and the criminal.

ChurpChurp Birdy says:
May 16, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Whether the police investigation will be affected or not is still a question but the event was a year ago. regardless of the ownership which has no power over to speak out loud, the core- means the community can easily bring up the issue just by exposing and sharing it around widely. The timeless idea of the CMC, has much disastrous effect on the mother in this video.

Maria Ng says:
May 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM

In my opinion, videos such as this one should never be allowed to spread like wildfire as it has been over the web. This is actually evidence towards the crime committed by a mother on her child. It should be in the hands of the law enforcers and treated as confidential. Although many would think that it is right to share the video to create awareness, but it violates the right of the individuals in the video and most importantly the child's future. Imagine the trauma she would have to face when she grows up. She would always be known as the baby girl whose mother abused. Remember that whenever we post and upload something, it may not necessary bring goodness but may actually hurt the person instead.

Amanda says:
May 16, 2012 at 10:18 PM

Chia, the uploader had already made a press release on this. She record this video because she wanted an evidence so that she can bring this case to the police. The abuser is her friend and she already begged her friend not to hit her own child. But in the end, she was hit by the abuser herself. There is no other way for her.

As for the question of who upload the video, of course he/she is guilty for spreading such video. Although this video can create awareness to the public, but the media (be it mainstream or alternative) are not supposed to show pictures or put in names of the victim or the wrongdoer out. If pictures are not suppose to be shown, what else video? The video is a straight up violation of court's order.

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Copyright © 2009 New Tech Issues All rights reserved. Theme by Laptop Geek. | Bloggerized by FalconHive.