Comment by codedokode
11 hours ago
Japan is more advanced than West in terms of privacy protection. When filming in the street, for example, for a street interview, TV typically blurs the faces of Japanese-looking people passing by (except for foreigners).
While in the West people have no respect to other people, and don't bother to blur anything. I think it would be better for everyone if you couldn't post photos of other people without their permission and if annoying Youtubers would go to jail.
Also when talking about some celebrity on TV they often show a drawing if they could not obtain rights to a photo.
> When filming in the street, for example, for a street interview, TV typically blurs the faces of Japanese-looking people passing by (except for foreigners). While in the West people have no respect to other people,
Am I missing something or is this just plain racism? There are lots of japanese people who don't look japanese, foreigners who are permanent residents, and japanese-looking people that aren't japanese - how is it respectful to protect just a certain ethnic groups privacy?
It's not racist. It's all about the intention; as a company, you don't want to expend a single extra dime to comply with the regulations. since the population is pretty much homogeneous you can just blur out the Japanese and you are pretty much guaranteed to cover 99% of the cases.
Business don't exist to respect or care about people they exist to generate profit so the idea of a business "respecting" something is not even realistic.
The law is what outlines what are the limits and guarantees the basics rights to everyone.
So, people are being treated differently entirely on the basis of their race - but it's not racist because they're lazily cutting corners in following a regulation? If they actually cared why would they not just blur all faces instead of looking at their race to decide whether or not to do it?
> Business don't exist to respect or care about people they exist to generate profit so the idea of a business "respecting" something is not even realistic.
People work at businesses, and those people make decisions that are influenced by their personal feelings. In a free market people will boycott them for doing bad things. Racist businesses being outted, receiving bad press and losing revenue - in this scenario it sounds like the japanese are okay with it. Being respectful is profitable.
It's easy: if you don't look Japanese, then you are not Japanese. A paper signed by someone in the government doesn’t make you Japanese.
Ok, so you're agreeing that it is "plain racism".
> A paper signed by someone in the government doesn’t make you Japanese.
You claim that the government of Japan does not have the power to bestow citizenship on individuals?
[flagged]
And what about visitors to the country? Do visitors get treated with more respect than strangers? In foreign cultures, they do. So this analogy doesn’t follow through.
1 reply →
I'd guess so judging by the downvotes.
1 reply →
Yes. The West likes flagellating itself for being racist, but in [current year] the rest of the world is invariably much more racist.
I try not to litter. I even pick up litter when I see it. Does the existence of serial rapists mean I shouldn't bother? Should we never worry about moderating our own behavior if anyone else out there is worse?
Is this a law in Japan or common curtoeusy? IN the West, the law is if you are in public, there is no expectation of privacy.
>While in the West people have no respect to other people
Big overgeneralization. Here in Germany the "Recht am Eigenen Bild" (literally right to your own image) has existed for decades, and similar to Japan publishing images of others has some pretty big limitations and without consent is usually restricted to places or persons of public interest. To the chagrin of Google Street view or Twitch streamers
It’s more generally known as personality rights / right to publicity and a lot of western countries have laws relating to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights
I think that's rather silly. If it's a public place, and I have the right to be there and see all these faces with my eyes, why can't I exercise this right mediated by a camera?
Because people don't want to be posted online and you should respect that. Seeing and posting online is different.
If you don't want to be filmed in public, don't go out in public, or cover your face with a mask.
1 reply →
> Japan is more advanced than West in terms of privacy protection
Please stop confusing the US / maybe UK, Canada, Australia, NZ with "the West".
Countries like Germany and France have very strong privacy protections.
> While in the West people have no respect to other people, and don't bother to blur anything. I think it would be better for everyone if you couldn't post photos of other people without their permission and if annoying Youtubers would go to jail.
Every burglars wet dream. I have no idea what crime is like in Japan but in EU this is not an option.
I am not sure but probably you can show a recording to police. But not post it online. Also punishment for burglary can be pretty heavy so better choose some other country.
As an example, in Spain it is illegal to have dashcams, and its content cannot be used in a trial - but you can share the content with insurances and policeman, and recording is generally not prosecuted. It is nonetheless an opening if an officer is searching for a way to fine you...
2 replies →
I don't understand what you're saying? Are you saying that the only reason people don't do crime is because of a lack of privacy? That's patently nonsensical.