Incoming

I am presenting as a photographer, as a citizen journalist and as a citizen.

As I outlined in my letter, I recently had the experience of being prevented from taking pictures in the Hamilton Public Library by a librarian and a security guard.

This is, unfortunately, becoming a more frequent occurrence in Canada, the U.S., the U.K. and worldwide. Photographers are being harassed, prevented and questioned by security guards and police simply because they took photographs of buildings or of citizens in public places. Sometimes those photographers were simply tourists, sometimes journalists. Sometimes they were artists, their photography being the art that they wanted to freely capture and express.

This should not be the case. Photography is not a crime. In Canada photographers, for non-commercial purposes, are free to take photographs of whatever, whomever, whenever they like in public spaces. Citizens in parks, on streets etc. do not have, or should not have, a reasonable expectation of privacy. They are in public. I would argue the same for someone at a work station in the midst of a well-lit, glass-walled public library.

However, the library and I disagree that the Hamilton Public Library, despite its name, public mandate and public funding, is a public space. Let us, for the moment, set that aside.

Right now, in order to take photographs in the library one must fill out a form and be accompanied by library staff. A public space, or not, I would argue this is an overly draconian, unproductice, outdated and ultimately unenforceable measure. I am here to encourage you to amend it.

I say it unproductive because it requires staff time that could be better spent elsewhere, I'm certain. It is outdated because we have seen, in the past two years, an explosion of mobile devices, including cellphones, which are capable of taking remarkably good still images and videos. Images from these devices are being shared every day, in the millions, on social networks such as flickr, twitter, facebook and many others. For this generation, these devices and these social networks have become a powerful means of celebrating moments, sharing discoveries and promoting destinations and events. Many organizations have discovered and cherish the power of crowd sourced videos and images as a free means of brand extension and exposure. In fact, this was precisely what I wanted to do with the images I was prevented from shooting and sharing.

It is unenforceable because, using those same small mobile devices, patrons are routinely taking pictures and videos in the library. They also with engage in video chats (now even from your cellphone using FaceTime and Skype). And, of course, lots of parents are snapping cellphone pictures of their children at play. In fact, two computers have built in webcams and applications that enable patrons to take photographs.

Many of these images will be shared on social networks. And, while you could request the images and videos be removed, again, it would be unproductive and would create mounting ill-will. And again, you must have better things to do.

Emerging media critic Clay Shirky has observed that "abundance breaks old filters". This is a clear and obvious example of just that. And, if you prevent only those photographers who have, say, DSLRs, then you are enforcing a policy in an arbitary and discriminatory manner. That is no way to engender compliant or good will. On the other hand, if you enforce it continually ... Well, you must have better things to do.

The situation, right now, is a lose/lose. You miss the opportunity for powerful social media celebration of all the library has to offer. Your library staff will be engaged in an increasingly frustrating game of whack-a-mole with patrons - a game which has not gone well for the record industry. And patrons lose by not being able to practise their art or cover their community with greater ease.

I would argue that the public library is a public place. The guidelines established by the Wisconson library I provided in my letter acknowledge that a priori and offer a brilliant and polite solution.

However, we disagree. And I suggest a compromise. A compromise suggested by the policies and real world practice of the Toronto Reference Library.

I recently visited that library and informed a librarian that I wished to take pictures. I was directed to the security desk. I was asked to fill out a simple form, which I have provided to you. With this signed form in hand I was free to take pictures of the library and of patrons, with their permission. For the next half hour I shot panoramas of the atrium, shared those images with my nearly 3,000 followers on Twitter and shared pictures of the library's Sherlock Holmes room and materials. This all to the delight of the curator and the patron I photographed after asking permission. I got very positive feedback on Twitter, especially from folks who had no idea there was a Sherlock Holmes room there.

Clearly, the Metro Toronto reference library, as a tourist destination, has learned both the power of social media and the futility of trying to stop patrons from capturing images in the library. While I was there I saw literally dozens of students with cellphones out, capturing images of themselves and the building with no interference from security, even though the security desk was a dozen feet from where the students were sitting.

You might argue that this suggests even greater vigilance and that the security personnel should be reprimanded and encouraged to remember the regulations. That would be the precisely wrong reaction, I would argue. What the security guards (and I suspect the Metro Reference Library's) stance actually demonstrates is that it is a library that is doing its legal duty is providing some constraints and is making an overt call for consideration. That done, it is then bowing to the unstoppable ubiquity of mobile media. The genie is out of the bottle, like it or not. In my day job I consult to universities, health care organizations and book publishers about social media. My message to them is the same one I am suggesting to you. Embrace the opportunity instead of resisting the change. The ability to sample and to share our world is now in the hands of almost everyone. We are social beings - we will share. This is a wonderful, human response to a complex and frightening world. We want to celebrate, to laugh together, to document, to remember and to express ourselves freely. These are good, natural impulses amplified by the tools that now fall so easily to hand. Find ways to use that river of sharing to your advantage. If you continually attempt to stop photography you will fail, you will apply rules in a discriminatory manner and, of course, on blogs and other social media tools, tales of your arbitrary draconian measures will appear and echo unstoppably. That too is reality.

So, a solution? I suggest that the Hamilton Public Library follow the Toronto Reference Library's lead and adopt a similar policy. This turns a lose/lose situation into a win/win. The process is less time consuming and onerous for you and satifies your legal responsibilities. You get great social media coverage and patrons have more ease when they wish to photograph and celebrate your facility. You will find photographers, when treated with respect, will return respect in kind to you and your patrons. Everybody wins.

I hope you will consider my proposal seriously. I look forward to hearing of the results and to being able to celebrate and share your facility in images soon.

Thanks for your kind attention.

Respectfully Submitted,
Wayne MacPhail