I wonder how this woman feels about having this picture on the front of AOL

[Renew Deal]

AOL has this picture on the front of their site:



I don't think it's any accident that this picture was chosen. It attracts attention. But I have to wonder how an innocent person like this woman feels about this picture being used, likely without her knowledge or consent. The picture is owned by Getty Images.

Is it appropriate to use a picture like this or a bikini shot during the summer in the newspaper? Do the people in the photo want to be seen this way? I'm not sure it's fair to her.

The story can be found here: http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/20/aol-investigation-no-proof-tsa-scanners-are-safe/

[davidinalameda]

1. I'd hope that she signed a waiver

if not, Getty is going to be on the hook for a nice little chunk of change

[Renew Deal]

2. Could this be considered a "news" photo?

I don't think you need a waiver to document news.

[TorchTheWitch]

60. permission, yes

I was asked permission to be filmed in a public place for a news segment. It was a cute local story about a duck and gave permission to be filmed for the news segment looking at the funny duck... no audio, no interview or anything like that, just to be photographed for the news segment. I gave permission and was filmed looking at the funny duck. A lot of others didn't give permission so weren't filmed. As it turned out they never used the film of me looking at the duck but did use a few of the other people. But they filmed a lot of people looking at the duck (with permission) and I guess they just used the few that they liked the best for whatever reason for the news segment.

I was kind of bummed they didn't use me in the news segment because I had a special relationship with that duck and had been checking on her every night. My dog got really protective of her, and every night when I took him for his walk the first thing he did was race us over to check the duck. If anyone else came around and wanted to get a closer look at her he'd stand in front of her protectively and wouldn't want to leave until they did. He was very upset when she was relocated to a nice duck sanctuary, and still dragged us over every night for weeks and search all around for her. She was probably a lot happier and healthier in her new home, but I feel like both me and the dog lost a friend when she was relocated. I even took him to the duck sanctuary to look for her figuring he'd be happy to know where she was, but he didn't seem interested. He watched the ducks for awhile and sniffed at the air but that was all. Interesting though that he never dragged us over to check the place where she used to be and look for her after that though, so maybe he did know she was at the duck sanctuary and was satisfied with that.

Ok, I'll shut up about the duck now.

[davidinalameda]

68. I don't think so

since it's owned by Getty and not one of the news companies

but who knows who they bought it from

[LisaL]

22. Hah? Based on what?

[WinkyDink]

47. Based on using identifiable but not so identified visages.

[davidinalameda]

69. illegal use of image?

someone can't take a picture of you and proceed to use it in ads or stuff like that

[FSogol]

3. That will become the TSA recruitment poster. n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

4. No expectation of privacy in public, no permission requried for use in news etc

The bubbas who really have a hard time with those concepts are the cops. Check out carlosmiller.com for some interesting stories.

[leftstreet]

5. What's wrong with the picture?

"Do the people in the photo want to be seen this way?"

How is it you see her?

[Renew Deal]

9. The picture is used because of her body

It's meant to attract attention to the story. But she really isn't the story and to me it seems sexualised.

[leftstreet]

12. Which woman?

[cleanhippie]

38. Exactly.

Well played.

:applause:

[snooper2]

42. sexualised?

how?

[treestar]

55. Would it be sexualized if she weren't so well built?

[sabrina 1]

11. I thought she was a criminal. This is not the way innocent

citizens are treated in democracies, is it? Being mauled by strangers in the airport is a crime, no matter who's doing it. Several lawsuits have been filed already and I hope more will be in the future, and if that was my photo, I would definitely be seeing a lawyer about it.

It's sad that Americans have become so used to abuse by their government, that they no longer see what is wrong with this kind of treatment of citizens. This violates the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and it's all for money, not even for some justifiable reason.

Chertoff and his corrupt, war criminal, buddies, smiles when he sees how easy it was to scare people into giving up more of their rights, and making him a very rich guy, instead doing what they should have done, prosecute him for the gross, criminal negligence he displayed during Katrina, which cost the lives of untold numbers of U.S. citizens.

I find this photo to be extremely offensive as do most people who grew up in free democracies.

[midnight]

33. Thank you sabrina.

[sabrina 1]

6. When I first looked at that, I thought she was being arrested for

a crime.

This is why I am not going to fly to NY in January. Hoping to take the train. NY btw, is hoping to pass legislation to ban these obscene and useless scanners. NJ too, from what I understand.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lame54]

Now it's on DU

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

8. Took me a minute to realize this was a TSA-Airport photo...

I was... er, uh... distracted :evilgrin:

[deaniac21]

10. I'm sure she is appalled.

[leftstreet]

16. Maybe appalled to think a security photo is being sexualised on the Internetz

:eyes:

[truebrit71]

24. ..or that THAT is the reason she was chosen for the nekkid camera scan in the first place...

....way to TOTALLY miss the point...

[Zywiec]

29. Why would she get the nekkid scan if they are doing a pat down?

It's one or the other isn't it?

[truebrit71]

36. Maybe she didn't want to be groped and chose the nekkid machine as the lessor of to two evils...

...either way someone at the TSA was going to get their jollies off from this woman..

[Lost-in-FL]

35. +1, nt

[Lost-in-FL]

13. I am trying hard... but still can't see anything wrong with the picture. nt

[Renew Deal]

14. Would you like a picture like that of you to be posted on a major American website?

Just to attract attention to a story?

[Lost-in-FL]

23. If I looked like that I wouldn't mind at all.

It only took me seconds to realize this was a TSA related photo and I didn't see anything sexual about it until you mentioned. The lady is attractive as photographers look for attractive people. What if it was shot by a female photographer? Would that change your mind? So far I have seen plenty of pictures of TSA agents examining people of all shades, sexes, nationalities, etc. All of them attractive, even cute grandmas. I think you are taking this out of proportion.

[treestar]

56. Bingo

[cleanhippie]

40. What do you mean by "a picture like that?"

Are you talking about the fact that she is being patted down? It happens everyday, at every airport, thousands of times.
What specifically are you objecting to about this picture?

[LisaL]

43. TSA is subjecting people out in public to the scanners and pat

downs. The pose (with arms up) this woman is in, is a standard pose for someone undergoing a scan. There are many photos of people undergoing these procedures. Why are you objecting to this particular one is beyond my understanding.

[Lost-in-FL]

44. Beyond my understanding too. nt

[LisaL]

50. The main objection to the photo appears to be is that a woman

undergoing this TSA screening procedure is attractive.

[Lost-in-FL]

64. And maybe a woman photographer made the shot. nt

[seabeyond]

18. i doubt you get it since the first male to make her a thing for his entertainment

reduced you to spittin out water and laughing.

[Lost-in-FL]

28. Sorry but I don't consider myself a bitter person.

Nothing bad about a natural reaction to something that is in my opinion funny even if you find it ignorant. People around here should laugh a little more instead of posting ludicrous situations just for the sport of being critical.

[kctim]

59. Well, technically

I still haven't seen the TSA pic so I only WISH to make her a thing for my entertainment. When that shows up, THEN I will make her one.

[seabeyond]

63. not suprised at all at the 1". nt

[truebrit71]

21. She is an extremely attractive and desirable woman..why was she chosen for the nekkid machine...

...maybe because someone wanted to look at her goodies without all of those clothes on?

The picture shows that someone that couldn't POSSIBLY be hiding anything has been "randomly" chosen to have their dignity taken from them...

[Lost-in-FL]

31. And the opinion of one person makes this a reality for everyone. I get it. nt

[truebrit71]

34. I think she's smoking hot, and the perv with the x-ray glasses thought so too...

..

[treestar]

57. But overweight women have to go through it also

Is it worse for her than for less attractive women?

[Cleita]

15. Maybe she regrets not wearing baggier clothes.

I certainly will do so when I fly in the future.

[seabeyond]

19. bagger clothes is reson for groping. nt

[LisaL]

20. Well that makes no sense to me.

Presumably TSA will only become suspicious you are hiding something under these clothes if you wear baggy clothes, in which case you are more likely to be selected for their enhanced screening procedures.

[LisaL]

17. The photo is taken out in public.

I have no idea how this woman feels about it, but someone subjected to TSA procedures out in public presumably doesn't have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

[Brickbat]

25. You have no expectation of privacy in public.

[originalpckelly]

26. Who reads AOL?

:shrug:

[LisaL]

30. I just did.

:wtf:

[Nailzberg]

27. Not sure how she feels, but I feel tingly.

[flvegan]

32. Thank you, AOL.

Nice, very nice.

[LisaL]

37. Dah.

Look at all the posters here complaining about TSA stories as if something was accomplished. When nothing was accomplished and TSA continues on with their enhanced screening procedures. But put a photo of an attractive woman undergoing an enhanced screening procedure into a story about TSA and it's all good! No complains.

[flvegan]

41. There was a story?

Hm, I didn't get past the picture.

[LisaL]

46. I read it. It's very informative.

[The Midway Rebel]

39. Warhol said we would all have our own 15 minutes of fame. I wonder...

if he ever considered we would all get our own 15 minutes of shame.

Public humiliation is the new norm and some people think it is titillating and others think that is funny. It is no wonder to me why it has been so easy to facilitate.

[snooper2]

45. maybe they should have used this picture

This? Look naked PITS :rofl:



or, this one?

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:PaJPjWnNc2ppiM:&t=1



here's a bikini pic they could have used

[WinkyDink]

49. I feel immense sadness about the last photo.

[WinkyDink]

48. It's the T&A....I mean, TSA!

[LanternWaste]

51. I think we're all prudes when it suits us.

I imagine we're all prudes and puritans when it suits us at the time....

[pitohui]

52. she;s a gorgeous woman who looks like a model

in fact since the pic came from getty images (a seller of stock photos, where the models are virtually always compensated for their image) then the odds are tremendously high that she IS a model

i am required to include a model release if i sell an image to getty, i assume this photographer did as well

next question?

[treestar]

58. good point

[11 Bravo]

53. And now the picture is on DU. Is it suddenly more fair to her now?

[treestar]

54. When you are out in public, you are fair game

we all are. There are cases on that. There is simply no right to privacy in public.

[JoePhilly]

61. If this was me ... and at some point it probably WILL BE ME ...

Here is what happens.

See, I'm a guy about 6 feet tall in my 40s. And I've gained some weight. Mostly in the front, right above the belt line.

My hips and butt are thinner, so I need a belt, or my pants will fall off.

Currently, when I go through the normal machines, I have to hold my pants up so they don't fall down (because I had to take off the belt).

If they make me do what this girl is doing ... everyone will get to see my choice of underwear!!!

Before I get any FURTHER past the TOO MUCH INFORMATION POINT ... which I have already crossed ... it does occur to me that ONE photo of ME, standing in that same position, with my pants around my ankles (and assuming I wore appropriate underwear) ... that might stop this altogether.

Also ... for those who say this photo of the woman is "public" ... maybe that is part of the problem too. If we need some special screening, make it more PRIVATE.

There is an upside for the girl .. maybe ... she might be able to make herself famous, and get PAID to discuss how she feels about this. Which I think would be what I would do if I was the one in the photo, with my pants having dropped to my ankles.

[Marr]

62. If it's owned by Getty, she signed a model release.

[Major Hogwash]

66. Are you sure about that? Because I've seen pictures of actors that Getty had that were atrocious

pictures of them that Getty put on the internet.

[Warren DeMontague]

65. BRING ON THE BURQAS!!!!

Seriously, she probably signed a release. People need to get a grip. We are sexual beings, and not everyone is a doily-clutching puritan.

[Fla_Democrat]

67. I would think better this photo, than

the one the screener is viewing.


:smoke:

[Warren DeMontague]

70. Every time you get an erection, God kills a kitten.

Please, think of the kittens.